MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107092757 · doi:10.1037/a0028513

Understanding heterogeneity in borderline personality disorder: Differences in affective reactivity explained by the traits of dependency and self-criticism.

2012· article· en· W2107092757 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel C. Kopala‐Sibley, David C. Zuroff, Jennifer J. Russell, D. S. Moskowitz, Joel Paris

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Abnormal Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyBorderline personality disorderNeuroticismAffect (linguistics)Self-criticismPersonalityClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyMultilevel modelSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined whether the personality traits of self-criticism and dependency respectively moderated the effects of perceived inferiority and emotional insecurity on negative affect during interpersonal interactions in individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD). A sample of 38 patients with BPD and matched community comparison participants completed event-contingent record forms after each significant interaction for a 20-day period. Multilevel models showed that, controlling for baseline levels of depressive symptoms and neuroticism, as well as lagged negative affect, event-level elevations in perceived inferiority and emotional insecurity were related to more negative affect in both groups. Event-level perceived inferiority was more strongly associated with negative affect in patients with BPD who reported higher levels of self-criticism, while event-level perceived emotional insecurity was more strongly associated with negative affect in patients with BPD who reported higher levels of dependency. No significant interactions emerged for the comparison group. These findings further our understanding of differences among patients with BPD and support the application of personality-vulnerability or diathesis-stress models in predicting negative affect in BPD. Results have implications for the design of therapies for patients with BPD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations75
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Abnormal PsychologySame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207