MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2388170357 · doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.01.1329

The effects of alexithymia in the recognition of dynamic emotional faces

2016· article· en· W2388170357 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marta Rocha, Sandra C. Soares, Samuel Silva, Nuno Madeira, Cristiana J. Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaPsychologyCategorizationDisgustFacial expressionTraitEmotional expressionCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyAngerSocial psychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Alexithymia is a multifactorial personality trait observed in several mental disorders, especially those with poor social functioning. Although it has been proposed that difficulties in interpersonal interactions in highly alexithymic individuals may stem from their reduced ability to express and recognize facial expressions, this still remains controversial. Aim In everyday life, faces displaying emotions are dynamic, although most studies have relied on static stimuli. The aim of this study was to investigate whether individuals with high levels of alexithymia differed from a control group in the categorization of emotional faces presented in a dynamic way. Given the highly dynamic nature of facial displays in real life, we used morphed videos depicting faces varying 1% from neutral to angry, disgust or happy faces, with a video presentation of 35 seconds. Method Sixty participants (27 males and 33 females) were divided into high (HA) and low levels of alexithymia (LA) by using the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). Participants were instructed to watch the face change from neutral to an emotion and to press a keyboard as soon as they could categorize an emotion expressed in the face. Results The results revealed an interaction between alexithymia and emotion showing that HA, compared to LA, were more inaccurate at categorizing angry faces. Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207