The relationships between implicit self-esteem, explicit self-esteem and alexithymia in college students
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To explore the relationships among implicit self-esteem, explicit self-esteem and alexithymia. Methods According to the scores of Toronto Alexithymia Scale(TAS-20), 82 tests were divided into the alexithymia group and the control group, which were assessed with Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale(SES) and Implicit Association Test (IAT). Results The level of explicit self-esteem in the alexithymia group was significantly lower than that of the control group((28.57±4.57 vs 32.44±2.71)), there was significant differences between two groups(P<0.01). Each factor of the alexithymia (as difficulty describing feelings, difficulty identifying feelings and externally oriented thinking) had significantly negative correlation with explicit self-esteem(r=-0.572, -0.52, -0.56, -0.378, P<0.01), and the alexithymia was positively correlated with the degree of separation in implicit and explicit self-esteem(r=0.421)(P<0.05). Conclusion The alexithymia group has defects in the process of controlling emotional; Alexithymia as a kind of psychological traits may be influence consistency of implicit and explicit self-esteem. Key words: Implicit self-esteem; Explicit self-esteem; Alexithymia
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it