Preliminary Examination of the Relationship Between Anxiety Disorders in Adults and Self-Reported History of Teasing or Bullying Experiences
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
This preliminary study examined the relationship between anxiety disorders and self-reported history of teasing or bullying experiences, comparing individuals with social phobia, obsessive compulsive disorder, and panic disorder with or without agoraphobia. Given that aversive conditioning experiences, such as severe teasing, have been proposed to play a role in the development of social phobia and that the core feature of social phobia is a fear of social situations in which a person may be embarrassed or humiliated, we hypothesized that the social phobia group would have a higher rate of self-reported teasing history than would the obsessive compulsive disorder or panic disorder groups. Consistent with this hypothesis, a relationship between reported history of teasing and diagnosis was found. A significantly greater percentage of participants in the social phobia group (92%) reported a history of severe teasing experiences compared with the obsessive compulsive disorder (50%) and panic disorder (35%) groups. History of teasing experiences was also significantly related to an earlier age of onset for all 3 anxiety disorders, and to a greater number of self-reported additional problems in childhood. These findings suggest further directions for research in this area and highlight the significant link between perceptions of teasing in childhood and social phobia.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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