The long-term effectiveness of a personality-targeted substance use prevention program on aggression from adolescence to early adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Addressing aggressive behavior in adolescence is a key step toward preventing violence and associated social and economic costs in adulthood. This study examined the secondary effects of the personality-targeted substance use preventive program Preventure on aggressive behavior from ages 13 to 20. Methods In total, 339 young people from nine independent schools ( M age = 13.03 years, s.d. = 0.47, range = 12–15) who rated highly on one of the four personality traits associated with increased substance use and other emotional/behavioral symptoms (i.e. impulsivity, anxiety sensitivity, sensation seeking, and negative thinking) were included in the analyses ( n = 145 in Preventure, n = 194 in control). Self-report assessments were administered at baseline and follow-up (6 months, 1, 2, 3, 5.5, and 7 years). Overall aggression and subtypes of aggressive behaviors (proactive, reactive) were examined using multilevel mixed-effects analysis accounting for school-level clustering. Results Across the 7-year follow-up period, the average yearly reduction in the frequency of aggressive behaviors ( b = −0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.64 to −0.20; p < 0.001), reactive aggression ( b = −0.22; 95% CI 0.35 to −0.10; p = 0.001), and proactive aggression ( b = −0.14; 95% CI −0.23 to −0.05; p = 0.002) was greater for the Preventure group compared to the control group. Conclusions The study suggests a brief personality-targeted intervention may have long-term impacts on aggression among young people; however, this interpretation is limited by imbalance of sex ratios between study groups.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".