Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article describes a conceptual framework for describing borderline personality disorder (BPD) based on empirical studies of the phenotypic structure and genetic architecture of personality. The proposed phenotype has 2 components: (1) a description of core self and interpersonal pathology-the defining features of personality disorder-as these features are expressed in the disorder; and (2) a set of traits based on the anxious-dependent or emotional dysregulation factor of the four-factor model of PD. Four kinds of traits are described: emotional (anxiousness, emotional reactivity, emotional intensity, and pessimistic-anhedonia), interpersonal (submissiveness, insecure attachment, social apprehensiveness, and need for approval), cognitive (cognitive dysregulation), and self-harm (behaviors and ideas). Formulation of the phenotype was guided by the conceptualization of personality as a system of interrelated sub-systems. The psychopathology associated with BPD involves most components of the system. The trait structure of the disorder is assumed to reflect the genetic architecture of personality and individual traits are assumed to be based on adaptive mechanisms. It is suggested that borderline traits are organized around the trait of anxiousness and that an important feature of BPD is dysregulation of the threat management system leading to pervasive fearfulness and unstable emotions. The interpersonal traits are assumed to be heritable characteristics that evolved to deal with interpersonal threats that arose as a result of social living. The potential for unstable and conflicted interpersonal relationships that is inherent to the disorder is assumed to result from the interplay between the adaptive structure of personality and psychosocial adversity. The etiology of the disorder is discussed in terms of biological and environmental factors associated with each component of the phenotype.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".