Test–retest reliability of the neuroanatomical correlates of impulsive personality traits in the adolescent brain cognitive development study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
= 7,083) visit of the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study to investigate the replicability of previous work (Owens et al., 2020) the neuroanatomical correlates of impulsive personality traits identified at age 9/10. Neuroanatomy was measured using structural and diffusion magnetic resonance imaging, and impulsive personality was measured using the UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale. Replicability was quantified using three Open Science Collaboration replication criteria, intraclass correlations, and elastic net regression modeling to make predictions across timepoints. Replicability was highly variable among traits: The neuroanatomical correlates of positive urgency showed substantial similarity between ages 9/10 and 11/12, negative urgency and sensation seeking showed moderate similarity across ages, and (lack of) premeditation and perseverance showed substantial dissimilarity across ages. In all cases, effect sizes between impulsive traits and brain variables were small. These findings suggest that, even for studies with large sample sizes and the same participant pool, the replicability of brain-behavior correlations across a 2-year period cannot be assumed. This may be due to developmental changes across the two timepoints or false-positive/false-negative results at one or both timepoints. These results also highlight an array of neuroanatomical structures that may be important to impulsive personality traits across development from childhood into adolescence. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".