Alexithymia and verbal representations of the other: what can SCORS coding of TAT narratives tell us?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The concept of alexithymia originated in psychosomatic medicine and refers to problems in experiencing and regulating affects. Nowadays, alexithymia is defined as consisting of four dimensions: (1) difficulty identifying feelings and distinguishing between feelings and the bodily sensations of emotional arousal, (2) difficulty describing feelings to other people, (3) constricted imaginal processes, and (4) a stimulus-bound, externally orientated style (Taylor, Bagby, & Parker, 1997). In this study the relation between alexithymia and social cognitions and object relations will be addressed. More specifically we hypothesize that alexithymia will be related to lower scores on the following subscales of the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale (SCORS): (a) complexity of representations, (b) emotional investment in relationships and (c) social causality of thematic apperception test (TAT) narratives. From the onset of the development of the alexithymia construct, the lack of investment in relationships is described as typical for alexithymic patients. These individuals with a poor representational life are described as ‘operational’ in their thinking and living; their mental life is strongly limited to the actual and the factual. The connection between alexithymia and interpersonal functioning is also found in empirical studies. It can be hypothesized that alexithymic patients have problems in the ability by which people ‘read’ and understand the minds of others, such that their actions can be framed as meaningful and predictable. In order to further investigate the relation between alexithymia and representations of others, the correlations between scores of 49 psychiatric inpatients on self-report and interview based measures of alexithymia and scores on the SCORS were calculated. Alexithymia was measured using the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) being the most widely used self-report measure for alexithymia and with the Toronto Structured Interview for Alexithymia (TSIA). The SCORS is a coding system, designed to be used on narrative material (e.g. TAT narratives) consisting of five clinician-rated scales that assess affective and cognitive aspects of an individual’s object relations and social cognitions. The scales are: complexity of representations, affective quality of representations, emotional investment in relationships, emotional investment in values and moral standards and understanding of social causality. Two trained independent raters scored the TAT-narratives. No significant relations between the TAS-20, it’s subscales and the SCORS subscales were found. Regarding the TSIA we found significant relations between the DIF and DDF scales and complexity of representations and social causality. A significant correlation between the TSIA total score and complexity was found as well. Results point out that the TAS-20 shows no theoretically consistent relations with external variables. With regard to the TSIA however, results seem to indicate that there is a link between alexithymia (especially problems in identifying and describing one’s own internal affective states) and the more cognitive aspects of object relations or mentalization about the other. Limitations of the study are indicated. Future research should clarify relations between different measurement methods of alexithymia and theoretically assumed relations with external variables.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,031 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».