MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406180018 · doi:10.1017/s0954579424001883

Observer-rated environmental sensitivity and its characterization at behavioral, genetic, and physiological levels

2025· article· en· W4406180018 on OpenAlexaff
Sofie Weyn, Francesca Lionetti, Daniel N. Klein, Elaine N. Aron, Arthur Aron, Elizabeth P. Hayden, Lea R. Dougherty, Shiva M. Singh, Monika A. Waszczuk, Roman Kotov, Anna R. Docherty, Andrey A. Shabalin, Michael Pluess

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment and Psychopathology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthEuropean CommissionVlaamse regeringKU LeuvenHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsTemperamentPsychologyGenome-wide association studyObservational studyAssociation (psychology)Clinical psychologyConfirmatory factor analysisGenetic associationDevelopmental psychologyStructural equation modelingGeneticsGenePersonalitySingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenotypeInternal medicineBiologyMedicineStatisticsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study investigated the psychometric properties of the Highly Sensitive Child-Rating System (HSC-RS), the existence of sensitivity groups, and the characterization of sensitivity at behavioral, genetic, and physiological levels in 541 preschoolers ( M ( SD ) age = 3.56(0.27); 45%male; 87%Caucasian). Temperament, genetic, cortisol, and electroencephalography asymmetry data were collected in subsamples ( n = 94-476). Results showed a reliable observational measure of sensitivity. Confirmatory factor and latent class analysis supported a one-factor solution and three sensitivity groups, that are a low (23.3%), medium (54.2%), and a high (22.5%) sensitivity group. Hierarchical regression analyses showed moderate associations between HSC-RS and observed temperament traits (i.e., behavioral level). In addition, a small negative association between HSC-RS and a genome-wide association study polygenic risk score (GWAS PGS) for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder was found. No relations with candidate genes, other GWAS PGS phenotypes, and physiological measures were found. Implications of our findings and possible explanations for a lack of these associations are discussed.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score0.875

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopment and PsychopathologySame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207