Longitudinal relations among temperament, cognitive control, and anxiety: From toddlerhood to late adolescence.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with a history of behaviorally inhibited (BI) temperament face a heightened risk for anxiety disorders and often use control strategies that are less planful. Although these relations have been observed concurrently in early childhood, middle childhood, and adolescence, few studies leverage longitudinal data to examine long-term prospective relations between cognitive control and anxiety. Using longitudinal data from 149 adolescents (55% female; from predominantly White middle-class families), we assessed temperament in toddlerhood and cognitive control and anxiety at 4, 12, 15, and 18 years of age. At age 4, separate measures of task switching and inhibitory control were obtained via the Dimensional Change Card Sort and Stroop tasks, respectively. At 12, 15, and 18 years of age, planful control was assessed with the AX-Continuous Performance Test, and anxiety symptoms were assessed via self-report. Growth curve models revealed that children with greater inhibitory control at age 4, regardless of BI status, experienced a sharper increase in anxiety symptoms across adolescence. Children with heightened BI during early childhood displayed lower levels of planful control at age 12, but experienced a more rapid improvement in these skills across adolescence. Children with greater task switching ability at age 4 displayed higher levels of planful control at age 12, but experienced a smaller increase in these skills across adolescence. Finally, children's growth rate for anxiety was unrelated to their growth rate for planful control. These findings reveal that early-life temperament, cognitive control, and anxiety remain interconnected across development, from toddlerhood to at least late adolescence. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".