Results from logistic regressions with RPM, father education, and mother education as predictors.

<p>*<i>p</i><.05;</p><p>**<i>p</i><.01.</p

The relation between RPM and psychosocial outcome (drug intake, violence, self-esteem and mental health).

<p>(a) RPM scores and annual prevalence of drug intake (%). (b) RPM scores and annual prevalence's percentages of moderate (MPV) and intense physical violence (IPV). (C) RPM scores and self-esteem (Means and <i>S.D</i>.). RPM score and perceived mental health (Means and <i>S.D.</i>). In each subfigure (a, b, c, d), RPM measures of fluid intelligence are presented from left (Higher levels of intelligence) to right (Lower levels of intelligence).</p

Population and random sampling for the countries diagnosed.

<p><i>n</i> = Sample achieved, <i>N</i> = Population. The table grade range (5 to 8th) represents the Chilean academic curricula including student of eight- to thirteen-year olds approximately.</p

RPM Scores associated to the bullying victimizer categories (χ² distances).

<p>Positive and higher values of χ² distances are indicative of and strong association. Negative score are indicative of a lack of association.</p

RPM Scores associated to the bullying victim categories (χ² distances).

<p>Positive and higher values of χ² distances are indicative of and strong association. Negative score are indicative of a lack of association.</p

RPM's five level score relating fluid intelligence with psychosocial adaptation.

<p>The scoring was based on previous standardized studies reported in Chile in a sample of 4258 students (Ivanovic et al. <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0024858#pone.0024858-Ivanovic1" target="_blank">[6]</a>). Using this parameter a relatively normal participant distribution was observed in our five score levels: Score 1: 5.3%; Score 2:19.4%; Score 3: 48.2%; Score 4:19.9; Score 5: 7.2%.</p

Bi-spatial diagram showing the relation between bullying behavior and SMP score (victimizer and victim).

<p>Circles display groups of categories close together.</p

Global Graph Theory Analysis.

<p>Columns indicate each resting-state condition, and rows indicate each graph metric. The Y-axis shows raw metric scores, and the X-axis shows the range of thresholds, from 50 to 800, in steps of 50 (excluding extreme values where networks disaggregate). <i>Boxes indicate significant and trend differences between JM and the control sample. Blue shadows represent controls</i>' <i>standard deviation area.</i></p

Resting-state networks.

<p>Most-often reported networks in previous research that contain groups of brain regions highly correlated with each other.</p

Heartbeat Detection Task (HBD).

<p>The Accuracy Index can vary between 0 and 1, with higher scores indicating better interoceptive sensitivity. <i>* indicates significant differences between JM and the control sample.</i></p