MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104960965 · doi:10.1375/twin.14.6.539

A Behavioral-Genetic Study of Alexithymia and its Relationships with Trait Emotional Intelligence

2011· article· en· W2104960965 on OpenAlexaffabout
Holly M. Baughman, Sara Schwartz, Julie Aitken Schermer, Livia Veselka, K. V. Petrides, Philip A. Vernon

Bibliographic record

VenueTwin Research and Human Genetics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaTraitEmotional intelligencePsychologyClinical psychologySocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study is the first to examine relationships between alexithymia and trait emotional intelligence (trait El or trait emotional self-efficacy) at the phenotypic, genetic, and environmental levels. The study was also conducted to resolve inconsistencies in previous twin studies that have provided estimates of the extent to which genetic and environmental factors contribute to individual differences in alexithymia. Participants were 216 monozygotic and 45 dizygotic same-sex twin pairs who completed the Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20. In a pilot study, a sub-sample of 118 MZ and 27 DZ pairs also completed the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire. Results demonstrated that a combination of genetic and non-shared environmental influences contribute to individual differences in alexithymia. As expected, alexithymia and trait El were negatively correlated at the phenotypic level. Bivariate behavioral genetic analyses showed that that all but one of these correlations was primarily attributable to correlated genetic factors and secondarily to correlated non-shared environmental factors.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.463
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.002 · 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

Citations17
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTwin Research and Human GeneticsSame topicEmotional Intelligence and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207