Role of Difficulties in Emotional Regulation and Alexithymia in Prediction of Bullying
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Bullying is an important and prevalent issue that can have many psychological, behavioral, cognitive, physical, economic, social, and cultural implications.In the meantime, the ability to regulate the emotions and alexithymia are among the factors influencing bullying behaviors.Therefore, the present study was carried out to investigate the role of difficulties in emotional regulation and alexithymia in predicting bullying.Method: The research design was descriptive and correlational.The study population consisted of all first cycle secondary school students of district 2 of Rasht city in the academic year 2017-2018.The study sample included 250 students selected by convenience sampling method.Illinois Bullying Scale (Espelage &Holt, 2001), Difficulties in Emotional Regulation Scale (Gratz & Roemer, 2004) and the twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (Bagby et al., 1994) were used to gather of data. Results:The results showed that non-acceptance of emotional responses (β= 0.21), difficulty engaging in goal-directed behavior (β= 0.43), impulse control difficulties (β= 0.70), lack of emotional awareness (β=0.33),lack of emotional clarity (β= 0.32) at the significance level of 0.01, limited access to emotion regulation strategies (β= 0.21), difficulty in identifying the feelings (β= 0.16), difficulty in describing the feelings (β= 0.23), and externally-oriented thinking (β= 0.24) at the significance level of 0.05 are able to predict bullying.Conclusion: In sum, the results showed the relationship between bullying, difficulties in emotional regulation and alexithymia.According to findings, applying programs and methods to increase the ability to regulate emotions and reduce the mood of adolescents' alexithymia may reduce bullying behaviors which are associated with many physical and psychological disorders.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".