Personality Traits and Family Size as the Predictors of Alexithymia among University Undergraduates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alexithymia is a maladaptive psychological problem characterized by the inability to identify and verbally describe emotions and feelings in one as well as in others. Expression of emotions is learned from the environment as well as an inborn tendency (Gunsch, 2010). Sifheos (1973) introduced the term alexithymia. The word alexithymia literally means no words for emotion, from the Greek a for lack, lexis for word and thymia for emotion. He also describes that alexithymia is a disturbance in affective and cognitive functioning and lack of ability to find words to describe feelings. The most important features of alexithymia are failure to discriminate one's feelings from the associated bodily sensations, inability to communicate one's feelings with others and absence of fantasy and inner thoughts.It is suggested that the maladaptive alexithymic attitude is associated with early life experiences, poor parenting style, any kind of trauma, too much attention of caretaker towards child body rather than emotional needs, and emotional inconsistency of caretakers (Krystal, 1988).Alexithymia is considered as a personality trait that may lead an individual to other medical and psychiatric disorders, but it is not necessary that an individual respond as a mental patient (Haviland, Warren, & Riggs, 2000). Personality is a collection of emotions, thoughts, and behavioral patterns unique to a person (Gunnertech, 2010).Most famous personality traits are Openness to Experience (O) (inventive, curious, fond of art and adventure, have unusual ideas and emotions, and variety of experience), Neuroticism (N) (sensitive, anxious, and irritable, have much anger, depression, or vulnerability) Extraversion (E) (energetic, cheerful, lively, sociable and outgoing with positive emotions), Agreeableness (A) (friendly, compassionate, characterized by trust, modesty, and compassion), Conscientiousness (C) (efficient, well organized, dutifulness, self-discipline, aim for achievement, behave in organize, and in planned manner show punctuality and purposefulness) (Digman, 1990). It is known as the FiveFactor Model (McCrae & John, 1992).Ejopeo (1999) examined the relationship between personality traits and alexithymia. Luminet, Bagby, Wagner, Taylor and Parker (1999) also conducted a research on alexithymia and Five -Factor Model (FFM) of personality. The study participants were 101 university students who completed the questionnaires, Twenty-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale and the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. The result of that study portrayed that alexithymia have positive correlation with Neuroticism (N) and negative relation with Extraversion (E) and Openness (O), whereas Agreeableness (A) and Conscientiousness (C) have found no significant relation with alexithymia.Another study has revealed that alexithymia is positively associated with neuroticism and negatively correlated with extraversion. Furthermore there was low correlation of alexithymia with psychoticism (Mayer, DiPaolo, & Salovey, 1990).Many researchers have revealed that alexithymia is positively associated with neuroticism (Luminet, Bagby, Wagner, Taylor, & Parker, 1999; Pandey, & Mandai, 1996; Schiattino, Sanfuentes, Lagarribel, Jara, Lolas, & Liberman, 1998; & Wise, Mann, & Shay, 1992) and introversion (Wise, Mann, & Shay, 1992; & Pandey, & Mandai, 1996).Some Studies are conducted on alexithymia and five-factor model of personality showed that extraversion and openness to experience are low correlated with low alexithymia and highly associated with neuroticism (Bagby, Parker, & Taylor, 1994; Muller, Buhner, & Ellgring, 2004; Zimmerman, Rossier, de Stadelhofen, & Gaillard, 2005).Philippe, Genoud, Rossier and Reicherts (2005) have used EPI Extraversion scale and Toronto Alexithymia Scale (Bagby, Taylor, & Parker, 1994) and the study participants were 93 adults. Results revealed that there is a meaning full relationship between alexithymia and emotional openness. …
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".