The Associations between Religion, Impulsivity, and Externalizing Behaviors in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In studies of adolescents and adults, religiosity has been identified as a protective factor for impulsivity-related behaviors and externalizing problems. No known studies to date have examined the relationship between religiosity and such outcomes in children. Thus, the current study examined in children whether (1) religion is associated with decreased impulsivity and externalizing symptoms, and if (2) religiosity is a protective factor in the association between impulsivity and externalizing symptoms. Data were from Wave 1 of the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study (children aged 9-10, N =11,875). Two self-report measures and the Cash Choice Task assessed impulsivity; the Child Behavior Checklist assessed externalizing symptoms; and child religiosity was assessed in parent interviews. Structural equation models examined religiosity (affiliation, service attendance, importance) as a moderator between impulsivity and externalizing symptoms. Greater religious attendance was significantly associated with decreased impulsivity. Christian affiliation was associated with increased impulsivity as compared to other religions. Contrary to our hypotheses, religiosity did not moderate associations between impulsivity and externalizing symptoms. Findings suggest impulsivity and externalizing behaviors are related to some domains of religiosity in children; however, the magnitude of the effect sizes was small, suggesting religiosity is not a particularly salient predictor of externalizing problems in children. Given these findings differ from those seen in studies of adolescents and adults, future studies should consider longitudinal designs to better understand how these relationships form across the lifespan.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".