Reliability and Factor Structure in an Adolescent Sample of the Dutch 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale
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 study investigated the psychometric properties of the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) in an adolescent sample (N = 406, ages 12 to 17). This is rarely done even though the TAS-20 is used in adolescent research. Five published factor models were tested. For good fitting models, a second-order model with alexithymia as a higher-order factor and metric invariance across sex and age groups was tested. Confirmatory factor analyses showed that the original three-factor model and a four-factor model provided acceptable fit. Both models were invariant across sex, but not across age. Second-order models did not provide good fit. Reliability was good for the "Difficulty identifying feelings" subscale and acceptable for the "Difficulty describing feelings" subscale, but not for the "Externally oriented thinking" subscale. Measuring alexithymia with the TAS-20 in adolescents thus seems problematic, especially in younger age groups.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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