Bibliographic record
Abstract
The author examines the impact of depression in borderline personality and attempts to explain its profound reasons from a psychoanalytical perspective. The psychic organization of the borderline personality predisposes to intense depressive affects. Being unable to come to a sufficiently harmonious psychic integration of life experiences and emotions, the individual conserves a divided and rigid organization of his internal world. The self is thus weakened and vulnerable, confused and defensive, what constitutes grounds for depressive affects. The diagnosis commands meticulous attention, because the borderline personality has tendency to project his difficult affects on people around him. It is often the therapist who first experiences the depression. The borderline personality's recourse to primitive defences renders him even more vulnerable and fragile in his interpersonal relationships and the failures are multiplied in his adaptation to the real world, education, work, personal relationship, etc. The author explains how the borderline personality has a particular way of entering in relation with people and situations. The borderline personality has a diffuse identity and does not distinguish well the borders between himself and the other. Thus, the borderline personality perceives the other more like an instrument to satisfy his own desires and needs. The other does not appear as similar and equal. His relational mode remains essentially narcissistic and his choices of objects as much as his identifications remain of narcissistic nature. This creates a confusion between a more or less important part of his Self and the other. Relational instability of the borderline personality entails breakups, losses that easily become sources of depression. The individual thus becomes lost, empty, depressed as if he was in fact losing an important part of himself.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".