Relationship between Attachment Style, Parental Bonding and Alexithymia in Adults with Somatoform Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study examines the relationship between parental bonding, adult attachment, and alexithymia in patients with Somatoform Disorders (SFD). There are few empirical studies to support the clinical hypothesis that alexithymia may be due to disturbances in the early parent-child relationship. SAMPLING AND METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, data from 76 patients with SFD were obtained, consisting of questionnaire measures of alexithymia (TAS scale), attachment style (BFKE), and also the German version of the MOPS (Measure of Parental Style), the FDEB scale for measuring perceived parental attitude. RESULTS: A higher than average prevalence of insecure attachment (n = 67, 88.2%) was found in our sample with SFD and a T-value of 54.3 (9.5) in the TAS total score, 22% reaching clinically significant alexithymia. Regression analyses demonstrated the relationship between the "ambivalent clinging" and "ambivalent withdrawing" attachment style and more marked alexithymia features. Furthermore, alexithymia was positively predicted by "indifference" in the relationship to the father, BDI, and Global severity index (SCL-90-R). CONCLUSION: The results of this study support the hypothesis that alexithymia is associated with perceived parental bonding and attachment style.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".