Relationship between Alexithymia,Coping Styles and Passive Psychology in Nurses
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To explore the relationship of alexithymia to passive psychology and the mediating effect of coping styles in it.Methods Toronto Alexithymia Scale(TAS-20),Trait Coping Stule Questionnaire(TCSQ) and Genera Health Questionnaire(GHQ-20) were used to perform a questionnaire in 503 nurses.Results(1)Alexithymia and passive coping styles were positively correlated with passive psychology(P0.01),active coping styles negatively with passive psychology(P0.01).(2) The model fit indices of coping styles as mediating variables in alexithymia and passive psychology wereχ2/df=1.459,RMSEA=0.030,CFI=0.995,IFI=0.995,RFI=0.966,TCI=0.989,NEI=0.985,respectively.The models fitted well.Alexithymia and coping styles explained 99% of total variance of passive psychology,mediating effect accounting for 94.59% of total effect.Conclusion Alexithymia and Coping Style are important factors influencing negative psychology of nurses.Coping style plays an important mediating role in influence of alexithymia on passive psychology.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it