Trait Aggression is Reflected by a Lower Temporal Stability of EEG Resting Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trait aggression can lead to catastrophic consequences for individuals and society. However, it remains unclear how aggressive people differ from others regarding basic, task-independent brain characteristics. We used EEG microstate analysis to investigate how the temporal organization of neural resting networks might help explain inter-individual differences in aggression. Microstates represent whole-brain networks, which are stable for short timeframes (40-120 ms) before quickly transitioning into other microstate types. Recent research demonstrates that the general temporal stability of microstates across types predicts higher levels of self-control and inhibitory control, and lower levels of risk-taking preferences. Given that these outcomes are inversely related to aggression, we investigated whether microstate stability at rest would predict lower levels of trait aggression. As males show higher levels of aggression than females, and males and females express aggression differently, we also tested for possible gender-differences. As hypothesized, people with higher levels of trait aggression showed lower microstate stability. This effect was moderated by gender, with men showing stronger associations compared to women. These findings support the notion that temporal dynamics of sub-second resting networks predict complex human traits. Furthermore, they provide initial indications of gender-differences in the functional significance of EEG microstates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".