Measuring Emotional Awareness from a Cognitive-Developmental Perspective: Portuguese Adaptation Studies of the Levels of Emotional Awareness Scale
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Levels of Emotional Awareness Scale (LEAS) was developed to assess the emotional awareness construct, based on a cognitive-developmental perspective and influenced by the Piaget and Werner theories. It is composed of 20 emotion-evoking scenes and has been used in multiple researches related to emotion regulation, alexithymia and psychiatric disorders. It is a well-documented, valid and reliable measure. Due to the extent of LEAS, some investigators have been using one of the parallel forms (LEAS-A), which is a part of the complete version, nevertheless there is a gap of studies concerning LEAS-A psychometric qualities. In the absence of measures for assessing the organization of the emotional experience in Portuguese samples, we developed the Portuguese version of LEAS, characterizing reliability and validity indicators and the same for LEAS-A. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three different studies were carried out with these versions, two with university students and another with a sample from the general population. RESULTS: The Portuguese version showed high levels of reliability, superior to those found in other adaptation procedures. LEAS-A showed good reliability and indicators of discriminant and concurrent validities. The LEAS-A scores were independent from negative affect and related to the externally-oriented thinking involved in alexithymia. CONCLUSIONS: The Portuguese LEAS and LEAS-A show very adequate qualities, which allow for their scientific use. Implications for clinical and research contexts 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it