Within‐ and between‐person associations among internalizing and externalizing problems during middle childhood
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Internalizing and externalizing problems are likely to co‐occur in childhood and are related to concurrent and prospective mental health outcomes. We examined the longitudinal relations among internalizing and externalizing problems during middle childhood utilizing the Random Intercept – Cross Lagged Panel Model. We investigated three research questions: (1) how overall levels of internalizing and externalizing problems are related, (2) whether internalizing and externalizing problems predict each other longitudinally, and (3) whether girls and boys show different longitudinal associations among internalizing and externalizing problems. Mother‐reported internalizing and externalizing problems were used through first to sixth grade ( N = 1364). Results showed positive random intercepts and positive within‐time correlations of internalizing and externalizing problems. Further, internalizing problems predicted externalizing problems at the within‐person level. Although previous research mostly has shown a significant effect from externalizing problems to internalizing problems, the current study shows that when within‐ and between‐person variance are disentangled, internalizing problems also may predict externalizing problems.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it