Social Anxiety and Alexithymia in Relation to Problematic Drinking and Theory of Mind
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cognitive models of social anxiety posit inaccurate appraisal of emotional states as a core feature. Such inaccurate appraisal also characterizes alexithymia, a trait defined by difficulties in identifying and describing emotional feelings and an externally oriented thinking style. Because both social anxiety and alexithymia have been linked to alcohol misuse and deficient theory of mind, the degree to which alexithymia might account for these associations with social anxiety merits investigation. The current study explored relationships between social anxiety (specifically social interaction anxiety), alexithymia, problematic drinking, and theory of mind after controlling for comorbid depression in a nonclinical sample of 242 participants (93 men) ranging in age from 18 to 35 years (M = 23.22 years, SD = 4.48). They completed an online questionnaire battery that included well-known measures of social anxiety (Social Interaction Anxiety Scale), alexithymia (Toronto Alexithymia Scale 20), theory of mind (Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test Revised), depression (Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-Depression Scale), and problematic drinking (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test). In hierarchical regression models, social anxiety predicted alexithymia even after depression and demographic factors were controlled for; alexithymia mediated relationships between social anxiety and both problematic drinking and deficient theory of mind. Assessment of alexithymia in those with social anxiety may potentially offer insight and directions for treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".