Sympathetic Skin Response in Social Anxiety Disorder and Its Relationship with Empathy Skills, and Alexithymia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Psycho-behavioral studies have shown that sympathetic skin response (SSR), which is an indicator of sympathetic function, is associated with emotional responses. It has been reported that SSR, which is claimed to be a biological indicator of empathy, has increased in Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD) patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between SSR and alexithymia, empathy in patients with SAD. METHOD: SAD patients and control group were applied Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, Toronto Alexithymia Scale, Empathy Quotient, Facial Emotion Identification and Discrimination tests (FID, FDSC); during the application FID, SSR were measured. The relationship between alexithymia and empathy levels were investigated. RESULTS: The number of SSR was higher in all visual stimuli of SAD patients (11.13±3.01) compared to the control group (7.4±3.57). More autonomous activity to negative stimuli (SAD: 10.55±2.82, control: 6.36±3.64), sensitivity to positive stimuli (SAD: 0.58±0.69, control: 1.03±0.8) was less than control group. While 41.7% of SAD patients had alexithymic features, 36.1% were diagnosed with depressive disorder. CONCLUSION: It was thought that depressive and alexithymic features may have contributed to increased sympathetic sensitivity to negative stimuli in SAD patients. Further studies are needed to examine the effects of this situation on the selection and creation of the treatment modalities.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".