The lability of behavior as a marker of comorbid depression and anxiety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines nine dynamical and three emotional aspects of behavior in depression and anxiety, singly and comorbidly. The study employs the Structure of Temperament Questionnaire Compact (STQ 77), whose 12 scales assess the energetic, lability and sensitivity aspects of behavior in the physical, social, mental and emotional domains. The STQ 77 was administered to 86 patients with Major Depression, 85 patients with an anxiety disorder, 43 patients with comorbid depression and anxiety, and 71 subjects without depression or anxiety disorder all presenting to a private outpatient clinical practice. Results: 1) Depression was associated with self-reports of increased impulsivity and rigidity of behavior; 2) Depressed patients reported significantly lower physical energy, tempo of physical activity and plasticity of behavior. The presence of comorbid anxiety further worsened these effects; 3) The ability to sustain attention on a mental task and to learn new information was lower in depressed patients than in other groups. Conclusions: comorbid depression and anxiety might be associates, decreasing adaptivity and the self-regulatory balance of behavior, leading to the de- velopment of extremes in behavioral reactivity (impulsivity and rigidity).v
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.003 |
| 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".