Do brain lesions in stroke affect basic emotions and attachment?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the current study was to investigate basic emotions and attachment in a sample of 86 stroke patients. We included a control group of 115 orthopedic patients (matched for age and cognitive status) without brain lesions to control for unspecific general illness effects of a traumatic recent event on basic emotions and attachment. In order to measure basic emotions and attachment style we applied the Affective Neuroscience Personality Scale (ANPS) and the Attachment Style Questionnaire (ASQ). The stroke patients showed significantly different scores in the SEEKING, SADNESS, and ANGER subscales of the ANPS as well as in the Relationship as Secondary Attachment dimension of the ASQ when compared to the control group. These differences show a pattern influenced by lesion location mainly as concerns basic emotions. Anterior, medial, left, and subcortical patients provide scores significantly lower in ANPS-SEEKING than the control group; ANPS-SADNESS scores in anterior, right, medial, and subcortical patients were significantly higher than those of the control group. ANPS-ANGER scores in posterior, right, and lateral patients were significantly higher than those in the control group; finally, the ANPS-FEAR showed slightly lower scores in posterior patients than in the control group. Minor effects on brain lesions were also individuated in the attachment style. Anterior lesion patients showed a significantly higher average score in the ASQ-Need for Approval subscale than the control group. ASQ-Confidence subscale scores differed significantly in stroke patients with lesions in medial brain regions when compared to control subjects. Scores at ANPS and ASQ subscales appear significantly more correlated in stroke patients than in the control group. Such finding of abnormalities, especially concerning basic emotions in stroke brain-lesioned patients, indicates that the effect of brain lesions may enhance the interrelation between basic emotions and attachment with respect to the control group.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".