Linking Romantic Attachment and Self-Injury: The Roles of the Behavioural Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attachment theory is considered an explanatory framework for understanding non-suicidal self-injury. Despite theoretical postulations, few studies have examined links between romantic attachment and its interconnected systems (the caregiving and sexual systems) and self-injury. This study investigated whether self-injurious thoughts and behaviours could be predicted by the functioning of the three systems. Two-hundred and sixty-three young adults participated in the study. Results revealed that participants endorsing self-injurious thoughts experience greater attachment anxiety and avoidance, controlling and compulsive romantic caregiving behaviours, and lower sexual satisfaction than participants with no thoughts. Conversely, findings indicate that the behavioural systems did not predict self-injurious behaviours. Such findings suggest that dimensions of the three interrelated behavioural systems hold unique roles in understanding young adult self-injurious thoughts, and that the constructs that predict self-injurious thoughts may differ from those that predict self-injurious behaviours.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".