Nonsuicidal self-injury-relief associations over the course of dialectical behaviour therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I examined the relationship between the strength of a cognitive nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI)-relief association and NSSI over time in the context of dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) among individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD).Self-injuring individuals with BPD were assessed for BPD and NSSI and randomly assigned to 6 or 12 months of comprehensive, standard DBT.Participants were re-assessed for NSSI every 3 months from the start of therapy for 24 months.The NSSI-relief association was assessed at baseline and again at 6 and 12 months after the start of therapy via the deliberate self-harm implicit association test (DSH IAT; Gratz et al., 2016).At baseline, participants also completed a measure of their motives for NSSI.Hypothesis 1 was that, at baseline, lifetime NSSI would be positively associated with the NSSI-relief association beyond self-reported emotion relief motives.Hypothesis 2 was that the NSSI-relief association would weaken over the course of one year after treatment began.Hypothesis 3 was that the NSSI-relief association at baseline would predict the rate of change of NSSI from baseline to the end of one year, such that a stronger NSSI-relief association would predict a slower rate.Hypothesis 3a was that the rate of change of NSSI from baseline to the end of one year would predict the rate of change of the NSSIrelief association from baseline to the end of one year, such that a greater rate of change of NSSI would predict a greater rate of change of the NSSI-relief association.Analyses revealed that lifetime NSSI was not associated with the NSSI-relief association beyond self-reported emotion relief motives.As well, the NSSI-relief association did not weaken over the course of one year.Finally, findings from parallel linear growth curve models did not support hypothesis 3 or 3a.These results suggest that the DSH IAT might not be sensitive to treatment effects in DBT for individuals with BPD in clinical populations.Findings also suggest that future research should investigate change in other processes that maintain NSSI, the association between DSH IAT D scores and NSSI consequences, and the relationship between NSSI and relief over time.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".