Attachment Security and Immunity in Healthy Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Attachment security is associated with health and possibly autonomic and endocrine reactivity to stress, however the relationship between attachment style and immune function has not yet been investigated. METHODS: A random sample of 61 female nurses provided a blood sample and completed the Perceived Stress Scale, the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale, and the Experiences in Close Relationships questionnaire. Immune measures included immunophenotypic analysis, lymphocyte proliferative response to Phytohemagglutinin, and NK cell cytotoxicity (NKCC). Statistical analysis focused on the relationship between attachment-related anxiety or avoidance and immune measures. Multiple regression was used to control for perceived stress and support, alexithymia, health-related behaviors possibly influencing immunity, and use of anti-inflammatory drugs, tobacco or alcohol. RESULTS: Attachment-related anxiety was not associated with any immune parameter. Attachment-related avoidance was associated with lower NKCC. This association was independent from the number of circulating NK cells, which suggests a change in cell functionality. Perceived stress was also associated with lower NKCC. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests a link between attachment security and immunity. While our findings should be interpreted with great caution and need replication, they are consistent with previous work suggesting that insecure attachment may be a risk factor for health and may relate to biological processes relevant to 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".