MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169592014 · doi:10.1521/suli.2005.35.4.388

Borderline Personality Disorder and Deliberate Self‐Harm: Does Experiential Avoidance Play a Role?

2005· article· en· W2169592014 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSuicide and Life-Threatening Behavior · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential avoidanceBorderline personality disorderHarmExperiential learningPsychologyAssociation (psychology)Clinical psychologyHarm avoidancePersonalitySelf-destructive behaviorHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlPsychotherapistPsychiatryBig Five personality traitsAnxietyMedicineSocial psychologyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The theory that borderline personality disorder (BPD) is associated with experiential avoidance, and that experiential avoidance mediates the association between BPD and deliberate, nonsuicidal self-harm was examined. Female inmate participants (N = 105) were given structured diagnostic assessments of BPD, as well as several measures of experiential avoidance. There was a high lifetime prevalence of past self-harm (47.6%). Higher dimensional scores representing BPD severity were associated with higher self-harm frequency and greater experiential avoidance. Structural equation modeling analyses indicated that experiential avoidance did not mediate the association between BPD and self-harm, although thought suppression was associated with self-harm frequency.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.302 · 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