MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nature–nurture interactions

2010· book-chapter· en· W983615859 on OpenAlexafffund
Marla B. Sokolowski, Joel D. Levine

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsNature versus nurtureBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Overview Inheritance is associated with a paradox: it roars with the survival of the species, while at the same time it whispers a fragile message that is constantly modified even among kin. The genes, the environmental context and the traits that arise from their interaction are interrelated. A complexity that characterises this three-way relationship has been attributed to the nature–nurture dichotomy. Traditionally, nature is understood to mean the genes , whereas nurture denotes the environment . So, for example, people may debate why one pumpkin is superior to another – was it the quality of the soil or other growth conditions in the pumpkin patch, or was it the specific combination of alleles in that pumpkin's genome? In recent years, there has been a long-overdue paradigm shift from a limited focus on the nature–nurture dichotomy to a more expansive view that includes gene by environment (G × E) interactions and even gene–environment (G ↔ E) interdependencies, as defined and discussed in this chapter (Rutter 2007). A mechanistic basis for the concept of interdependency arose from advances in molecular biology and genomics which show that DNA is not only inherited but is also environmentally responsive. The latter argument is supported by findings that individuals with dissimilarities in their DNA (DNA polymorphisms) are differentially affected by the same environment. Different environments through development and adulthood can affect individuals with one genetic variant but not another.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.009
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations12
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207