MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063145178 · doi:10.1159/000287930

Influence of Alexithymic Characteristics on Physiological and Subjective Stress Responses in Normal Individuals

2010· article· en· W2063145178 on OpenAlexaff
John B. Martin, Robert O. Pihl

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychotherapy and Psychosomatics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaPsychologyFight-or-flight responseAnxietyDissociation (chemistry)Stress (linguistics)Developmental psychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individual differences in response to stress have been linked to the development of stress-related disorders through the presence of a dissociation between physiological and subjective stress responses. It has been suggested that the presence of alexithymic characteristics may constitute a new source of individual response differences and thereby contribute to the development of a stress-related disorder. However, it is also possible that the presence of alexithymic characteristics is simply a new name for a preexisting construct. The present study examined subjective and physiological stress response patterns in normal individuals with high or low presence of alexithymic characteristics, and the relationship between alexithymia and potentially equivalent constructs. The results revealed that the presence of alexithymic characteristics is independent of repression, trait anxiety, and social desirability. As well, high alexithymics appear to manifest high levels of sympathetic activity, and a dissociation between subjective and physiological stress responses. These results are discussed in terms of the potential contribution of alexithymic characteristics to the development of stress-related disorders.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations132
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychotherapy and PsychosomaticsSame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207