MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395048410 · doi:10.1080/14789949.2024.2343841

Still waters run deep: self-control as a moderator of dark personality traits for antisocial conduct and violent attitudes

2024· article· en· W4395048410 on OpenAlexaff
Matt DeLisi, Pedro Pechorro, Kevin L. Nunes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersUniversidade de Coimbra
KeywordsPsychopathyPsychologyModerationMachiavellianismSelf-controlDark triadAntisocial personality disorderPersonalityNarcissismBig Five personality traitsJuvenile delinquencyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPoison controlSocial psychologyInjury prevention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although self-control is frequently comorbid with other antisocial features, some individuals who exhibit psychological risk factors for antisocial conduct nevertheless have relatively high self-control. With this complexity in mind, the current study examined self-control as a potential moderator of antisociality/criminality features and violent attitudes using a community sample of 354 adult participants from Portugal. We found significant evidence that self-control moderates the dark core of personality when predicting antisociality/criminality, but not when predicting violent attitudes. We also found self-control moderates psychopathy when predicting antisocialty/criminality, but self-control had more robust moderation effects for violent attitudes. Specifically, self-control moderated narcissism, psychopathy, and sadism. Self-control did not moderate Machiavellianism in either model. Findings corroborate the notion that self-control plays an important role in moderating some dark traits of personality that are significant predictors for antisocial/criminal behaviors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Forensic Psychiatry and PsychologySame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207