Verteilung des Persönlichkeitsmerkmals Alexithymie bei Patienten in stationärer psychosomatischer Behandlung - gemessen mit TAS-20 und LEAS
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
Preliminary findings of an ongoing study of the distribution of alexithymia in different diagnostic-groups of psychosomatically ill in-patients (n = 240, will be increased to n = 400) are reported. Alexithymiea is measured simultaneousely by the Levels of Emotional Awareness Scale (LEAS, a performance-test) and the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS 20, a self-report-scale). Measured by the LEAS and compared with other diagnostic groups (affective, anxiety and compulsive-obsessive disorders; adjustment disorders; eating disorders), patients with somatoform disorders showed a decreased ability to be aware of and to communicate their emotional states. This finding which meets theoretical considerations about the origin of alexithymia could not be found with the TAS 20. The TAS 20 did not differentiate between the diagnostic groups, but showed - in accordance with two other self-report-scales (STAI for self reported anxiety as a personality trait and SCL-90-R for self reported somatic und psychic complaints) - higher mean scores at the onset than at the end of treatment. Methodical implications of the different findings of the two alexithymia scales are discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.011 |
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