The association between locus of control, emotion regulation and borderline personality disorder features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Locus of control (LOC) represents individuals' beliefs about how much control they have over outcomes in their life. Previous research has found an association between external LOC and psychopathology. Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is characterized by mood instability, identity disturbance and difficulties in impulse control. AIMS: The aims of this study are to evaluate the relationship between BPD features and LOC in a non-clinical sample and to assess whether external LOC is associated with BPD features after controlling for symptoms of depression and anxiety. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study of 328 university students, we assessed LOC, BPD features, depression and anxiety, as well as difficulties in emotion regulation and cognitive emotion regulation as potential mediators. RESULTS: We found an association between external LOC and BPD features after controlling for symptoms of depression, anxiety and demographic covariates. Assessing for indirect effects through potential mediators, we found that difficulties in emotion regulation, but not cognitive emotion regulation, partially mediated the relationship between external LOC and BPD features. CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide support for a unique association between external LOC and BPD features and suggest a role for external LOC in related emotion regulation problems. Future investigations using experimental designs should examine potential causal associations and the effect of changing LOC on emotion regulation and features of BPD. Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 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".