[The relationship between the dimensions of alexithymia and the intensity of depression and anxiety].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to underline the multidimensional nature of alexithymia, and to examine the relationship between these dimensions and the intensity of depression and anxiety symptoms. METHOD: The study included 145 undergraduate students that were administered 4 self-report instruments, including the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). RESULTS: In accordance with the aim of the study, due to the increased number of items and relative strength of the psychometric characteristics of the subscales, the 26-item version of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-26) was used. Following the factor analysis run for TAS, 3 dimensions with high internal consistency coefficients were obtained: 1. Difficulty in communicating feelings; 2. Difficulty in recognizing and identifying feelings; 3. Lacking in imaginative capacity. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that the intensity of depressive symptoms was only related to an increase in the difficulty in communicating feelings; on the other hand the intensity of anxiety symptoms was related to an increase in difficulty in recognizing and identifying feelings and also conversely to depression symptoms, the intensity of anxiety symptoms was found to be related a decrease in the difficulty in communicating feelings dimension of alexithymia. CONCLUSION: This study not only addressed the multidimensional nature of alexithymia, but also suggests further studies to consider alexithymia as a discriminating factor between depression and anxiety symptoms. According to the study, while people who have intensive depressive symptoms have difficulty in communicating their feelings, people who have anxiety symptoms tend to communicate more their feelings. In addition, the intensity of anxiety is positively related to difficulty in recognizing and identifying feelings. Another words, anxious people tend to have difficulty in recognizing and identifying their feelings. These findings of the study are discussed in light of the literature.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".