Emotional Awareness and Alexithymia in Smokers Seeking Help for Cessation: A Clinical Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The construct of emotional awareness refers to attending to, identifying, differentiating, and labelling emotions in oneself and in others. Forty-two smokers were evaluated before they stopped smoking and also filled out the Levels of Emotional Awareness Scale (LEAS), the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), and the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS). Subjects had low levels of emotional awareness and their scores on the emotional components of the TAS-20 were high in comparison to the general French population. No relationship was found between TAS-20 and LEAS, which confirms that these scales measure complementary dimensions of emotional processing that are only partially linked. Whereas sensation seeking was lower in self-rated alexithymic subjects, high scores on Boredom Susceptibility and total SSS among women were related to low LEAS scores. The results highlighted impairment of emotion processing in these subjects. Their state versus trait status is discussed, as well as their defensive functions. Treatment targeting emotional abilities enhancement for these subjects, as in other addictions, may help improve treatment of tobacco dependence.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".