Alexitimia y conducta impulsiva en adolescentes escolares de la provincia de Ilo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ésta investigación tuvo como objetivo principal correlacionar la alexitimia y las conductas impulsivas en una muestra de adolescentes escolares de la Provincia de Ilo, y, además, establecer comparaciones según el sexo. Los participantes fueron adolescentes (53% hombres y 47% mujeres) entre los 13 y 18 años de edad, a quienes se les administró la Escala de Alexitimia de Toronto (1994) y el Inventario de Impulsividad de Dickman (1990). Los resultados indican que existe correlación entre la alexitimia y la impulsividad disfuncional. Se halló que dificultad para reconocer los sentimientos (rs =.36) y el pensamiento operatorio (rs =.41) correlacionaron de manera directa y moderada con la impulsividad disfuncional. Además, la dificultad para describir los sentimientos correlacionó de manera directa y baja con la impulsividad disfuncional (rs= 27) y de forma inversa y baja con la impulsividad funcional (rs= -.19). Finalmente, se halló mayor dificultad para describir y reconocer los sentimientos en las mujeres, y mayor impulsividad funcional en los hombres.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".