Psychosocial Correlates of Alexithymia in a Rural Adolescent Residential Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study used a multimethod approach to evaluate the relationship of alexithymia (as measured by the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale and the 30-item Emotion Awareness Questionnaire), psychosocial development (assessed with the Measure of Psychosocial Development), and risk behavior (as measured by the Youth Comprehensive Risk Assessment) in 67 adolescents (85% from rural communities) in a rural residential treatment facility. Results revealed that both measures of alexithymia demonstrated good internal consistency and convergent validity. The EAQ-30 demonstrated stronger convergent validity over the TAS-20 with psychosocial measures of shame, inferiority, and role confusion and was more robust in differentiating risk behavior among males and females. Adolescent females scored higher on measures of alexithymia than males and demonstrated significantly more shame, diminished bodily awareness, and risk to self; whereas, males demonstrated significantly more risk to others. Overall, this study contributes to the current literature of alexithymia, provides further support for the validity of the alexithymia construct with adolescents, and sheds light on the importance of emotional awareness and expression in adolescent psychosocial development. Although exploratory, this study also increases clinical understanding of how risk behavior develops and manifests differently in male and female adolescents, specifically with regard to shame and diminished bodily awareness.
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) | 0.001 | 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".