MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392109235 · doi:10.1177/01461672241228624

Personality Trait Change Across a Major Global Stressor

2024· article· en· W4392109235 on OpenAlexafffund
K. Kyle, Brett Q. Ford, Emily C Willroth

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council
KeywordsConscientiousnessAgreeablenessBig Five personality traitsPsychologyNeuroticismExtraversion and introversionTraitStressorMental healthPersonalityContext (archaeology)Hierarchical structure of the Big FiveClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

= 504): (a) How did Big Five traits change during the COVID-19 pandemic? (b) What factors were associated with individual differences in trait change? and (c) How was Big Five trait change associated with downstream well-being, mental health, and physical health? On average, across the 21-month study period, conscientiousness increased slightly, and extraversion decreased slightly. Individual trajectories varied around these average trajectories, and although few factors predicted these individual differences, greater increases in conscientiousness, extraversion, and agreeableness, and greater decreases in neuroticism were associated better well-being and fewer mental and physical health symptoms. The present research provides evidence that traits can change in the context of a major global stressor and that socially desirable patterns of trait change are associated with better health.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonality and Social Psychology BulletinSame topicPersonality Traits and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207