Psychometric Properties of a Scale to Measure Alexithymia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four studies were conducted on a sample of 230 undergraduates to determine the psychometric properties of a measure of alexithymia, the Schalling-Sifneos Scale. In the first study it was found that scores on the scale are approximately normally distributed for each sex with 8.2% of males and 1.8% of females in the alexithymia range. In the second study a factor analysis of the scale revealed three distinct factors: (1) 'difficulty in expression of feelings'; (2) 'the importance of feelings especially about people'; (3) 'day-dreaming or introspection'. In the second factor analytic study, scores from several standard psychological tests on the same subjects were introduced with the scale items. Two factors in this analysis were comprised almost entirely of the other test scores: a 'general psychological distress factor' and a 'concerns about physical symptoms factor'. The other two factors were similar to factors 1 and 2 above in terms of items. The Rathus Assertiveness Scale loaded positively on the equivalent of factor 1. In the lst study, it was shown that Schalling-Sifneos Scale score is relatively orthogonal to other psychological tests with the exception of a Psychosomatic Symptom Checklist and thus is measuring something other than depression, anxiety, etc.
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 | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".