MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997852456 · doi:10.5406/amerjpsyc.132.4.0451

Personality and Alcohol-Related Risk: Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Alexithymia

2019· article· en· W2997852456 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael Lyvers, Megan Boileau, Fred Arne Thorberg

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Psychology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaNeuroticismPsychologyExtraversion and introversionToronto Alexithymia ScaleTrait theoryPersonalityBig Five personality traitsHierarchical structure of the Big FiveClinical psychologyMoodSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Previous research has established associations of neuroticism and extraversion with risky or problematic alcohol use in both clinical and nonclinical samples. More recently, alexithymia—a personality trait defined by difficulties in identifying and describing feelings as well as concrete thinking—has been implicated as a risk factor for problematic drinking; however, whether it is an independent risk factor or overlaps with others has not been determined. The present study examined neuroticism, extraversion, and alexithymia in relation to risky drinking in a nonclinical sample of 285 alcohol consumers aged 18-60 years. Neuroticism and extraversion were measured with the International Personality Item Pool Big Five Factor Markers, whereas alexithymia was measured with the Toronto Alexithymia Scale 20. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test provided an index of alcohol-related risk. Hierarchical regression indicated that neuroticism, extraversion, and alexithymia were all significant positive predictors of risky drinking after controlling for demographic and mood variables. Alexithymia was positively related to neuroticism, and both were negatively related to extraversion. The relationship between alexithymia and risky drinking was partially mediated by neuroticism, and the association of alexithymia with neuroticism was partially mediated by negative mood. Neuroticism, extraversion, and alexithymia appear to be independently related to alcohol-related risk, although the influence of alexithymia may partially overlap with that of neuroticism. Both alexithymia and neuroticism are associated with proneness to negative moods; a reliance on drinking to cope with such states may account for the links of both traits to risky or problematic drinking in line with Cloninger’s type I alcoholism. However, additional aspects of alexithymia may also contribute to its role in alcohol-related risk. The relationship of extraversion to risky drinking appears congruent with Cloninger’s type II alcoholism, where high reward sensitivity motivates drinking to enhance positive states.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of PsychologySame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207