Emotional reactivity to social rejection versus a frustration induction among persons with borderline personality features.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This laboratory study examined the emotional reactivity of persons with heightened borderline personality (BP) features to a social rejection stressor. Participants with high levels of BP features (n = 43) and controls with low levels of BP features (n = 67) were randomly assigned to a condition involving negative evaluation and social rejection based on personal characteristics, or to a condition involving a frustrating arithmetic task and negative evaluation based on performance. Hypotheses were that the high-BP individuals would demonstrate greater increases in negative emotions, shame, and anger in response to the social rejection/negative evaluation stressor, compared with the frustrating arithmetic task. The high-BP group showed significant increases in negative emotions in both conditions, significant increases in shame only in the frustrating arithmetic task, and significant increases in hostility only in the social rejection condition. In contrast, low-BP controls showed significant increases in negative emotions generally in the frustrating arithmetic condition and shame specifically in the social rejection condition. These findings highlight the emotion and context-specific nature of emotional reactivity in relation to BP features.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".