نقش واسطهای پریشانی روانشناختی، راهبرد ارزیابی مجدد تنظیم هیجان و راهبرد سرکوبگری تنظیم هیجان در رابطه خشونت خانگی و عملکردهای شناختی در زنان قربانی خشونت
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to provide a model for the relationship between domestic violence and cognitive functions by examining the mediating role of psychological distress and emotion-regulation strategies in female victims of violence through a path analysis. The statistical population of this study consisted of female victims of violence who visited different branches of Tehran Forensic Medicine Center in 2018. Considering the relationship between research variables in such sample, the research method was descriptive-correlative type. The relationship between the variables was analyzed according to the research goals. After obtaining subjects’ informed consent, 200 abused women were selected by a purposive sampling method, based on entry-exit criteria. Then they were asked to fill out questionnairs including Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ) (Gross and John 2003), Domestic Violence Questionnaire (Pournaghash Tehrani, 2005), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) (2005) and the short-form version of the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) (1995). Results showed that the proposed modified empirical model has good fit indices. According to this model, domestic violence has direct and indirect effects on cognitive functions. In addition, psychological distress, reappraisal emotion-regulation strategy and suppression emotion-regulation strategy had a mediating role in the relationship between domestic violence and cognitive functions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.006 |
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".