Effectiveness of Group Psycho Educational Training of Emotional Intelligence on Alexithymia and General Health in Iranian Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of psycho educational group training of emotional intelligence (EI) on improving scores of alexithymia and general health in Iranian students. 36 university students were selected as participants and were randomly assigned to three groups. Participants were evaluated using the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) at pre and post test and one month after the completion of the training sessions. One group (Training) received two hour weekly psycho educational sessions of group EI training for four weeks based on the theoretical frame work of Salovey and Mayer. Another group (Information) received a self-study pamphlet about EI and members of a third group (Waiting) were put in a waiting list and were given the training after two months. Analysis of variance revealed that EI training had the following significant effects: the intensity of two aspects of alexithymia, namely difficulty identifying and describing feelings, as well as two aspects of general health, namely depression and anxiety, decreased significantly in the Training group as compared to the other groups. No significant difference was observed between the Waiting and the Information groups in terms of alexithymia and general health. Findings show support for the effectiveness of psych educational training to improve alexithymia and general health.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".