Dental Anxiety and Personality: Investigating the Relationship Between Dental Anxiety and Self‐Consciousness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated whether personality plays a role in a condition called dental anxiety. Specifically, the study examined the relationship between dental anxiety (the negative response to the stress elicited from a dental interaction) and self-consciousness (the tendency to evaluate aspects of oneself that are subject to private and public display). The purpose of this study was to identify the characteristics possessed by dentally anxious individuals who face potential health risks because of their avoidance. Sixty York University undergraduate students were recruited by convenience sampling to participate. These subjects completed Corah's Dental Anxiety Scale and the Self-Consciousness Scale. The Self-Consciousness Scale consists of three subscales, including private self-consciousness, public self-consciousness, and social anxiety. Results indicated an 0.54 significant correlation between dental anxiety and self-consciousness. The public self-consciousness and social anxiety subscales correlated the most with dental anxiety. Furthermore, the data did not indicate a significant moderating relationship for gender between the two aforementioned variables. These results contribute to the establishment of personality characteristics as one of the dimensions determining dental anxiety.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".