Clarifying the Relationship Between AS Dimensions and PTSD Symptom Clusters: Are Negative and Positive Affectivity Theoretically Relevant Constructs?
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
The association between anxiety sensitivity (AS) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has been established in contemporary literature; however, research is divided over the nature of specific relationships between AS dimensions and PTSD symptoms clusters. Further, a paucity of research has examined the AS and PTSD relationship while accounting for theoretically relevant variables, such as negative (NA) and positive affect (PA). The purpose of the current study was twofold: first, to clarify divergent findings regarding the contribution of AS dimensions to PTSD symptom clusters, and, second, to further assess the relevance of NA and PA within the AS/PTSD relationship. Hierarchal regression analyses showed that, beyond shared variance attributable to NA and PA, AS somatic concerns were significantly associated with three of four PTSD symptom (i.e., reexperiencing, numbing, hyperarousal), AS cognitive concerns were only associated with hyperarousal, and AS socially observable symptoms were not significantly associated with any PTSD symptom clusters. These findings suggest that AS somatic concerns are the most robust predictor of variance within the AS/PTSD relationship and further clarify the theoretical importance of NA and PA within this relationship. Comprehensive results, implication, and directions for future research are discussed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it