Borderline Personality Features Moderate Emotion Reactivity and Emotion Regulation in Response to a Fear Stressor
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 examined emotional reactivity and emotion regulation strategies used by participants high (n = 41) and low (n = 55) in borderline personality (BP) features. Participants were randomly assigned to a neutral or fear emotion induction, and emotional responses (self-report and psychophysiological) were assessed. Participants also reported the types of strategies they used to regulate their emotions during the emotion induction. The high-BP (but not low-BP) participants reported greater fear, Upset, and hostility in the fear condition compared with the neutral condition. The participants in the fear condition evidenced vagal withdrawal, relative to the neutral condition, although there was some evidence of vagal withdrawal among the high-BP group in the neutral condition as well. Further, the high-BP (vs. low-BP) participants reported greater use of distraction, cognitive reappraisal, and emotion suppression, and less use of emotional acceptance. Reported use of acceptance partially mediated the moderation effect of BP features on the relationship between condition and reported hostility.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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