Alexithymia is associated with low tolerance to experimental painful stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alexithymics are known to report more somatic complaints than individuals scoring low on alexithymia. It was examined whether alexithymia would also be associated with enhanced sensitivity to an externally administered unpleasant physical stimulus. Forty-one healthy male and female subjects with a mean age of 33.9 years completed the 20-item version of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale and participated in a laboratory protocol consisting of exposure to painful electric stimulation. Multiple stepwise regression analyses revealed that after controlling for sensory threshold, duration of stimulation, and self-reported caffeine consumption, alexithymia predicted significantly pain tolerance level (beta=-0.33, P=0.01). Externally oriented thinking and difficulty identifying feelings, but not difficulty communicating feelings, were responsible for this association. Previous findings and the present results together indicate that alexithymia may be associated with an enhanced sensitivity to both internal (somatic) unpleasant sensations and externally induced pain, suggesting a potential general hypersensitivity to unpleasant stimuli in individuals scoring high on this trait.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".