TAS‐20 alexithymia in obesity, and its links to personality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the association between alexithymia (20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale, TAS-20) and obesity, and also assessed the construct validity of the TAS-20 in terms of personality dimensions in obese patients. The TAS-20 and its subscales were analysed for their correlations with the NEO Personality Inventory - Revised (NEO PI-R) in an obese sample of 259 patients. Obesity was associated with higher scores on the TAS-20 than a Swedish reference sample. Obese men furthermore scored higher on Externally Oriented Thinking than the obese women. TAS-20 scores correlated with elevated Neuroticism and lower levels of Extraversion and Openness, in agreement with most previous research, but also somewhat unexpectedly with lower Conscientiousness and for women also with lower Agreeableness. The TAS-20 subscales showed divergent associations with personality variables, largely in accordance with previous findings. The associations were more prominent for the women, and some gender-specific patterns not previously reported were also revealed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".