Relationship of Internet Addiction with Alexithymia and Childhood’s Perceived Parenting in University Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electronic media are integral part of everyday life and undoubtedly facilitate it on multiple levels. Internet is a useful work, knowledge (Papanikolaou, Makri, Magoulas, Chinou, Georgalas & Roussos, 2016), entertainment and information tool, but its limitless range often proves unsafe for the user. The present study, focuses on the relationship among web addiction, alexithymia and childhood’s perceived parenting while controlling for the indirect effect of depression. For the aims of the present study, 206 Greek University students attending Social, Exact Sciences and Ηumanities Departments, mean age 21, filled in a battery of measures; the Young’s Internet Addiction Test IAT (Young, 1998), the Toronto Alexithymia scale (Bagby, Parker & Taylor, 1994) the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale CES - D (Radloff, 1977), the Parental Bonding Instrument PBI of Parker, Tupling and Brown (1979) and a demographics form. Alexithymia presents significant direct association with Internet addiction, while the factors which mediate this relationship remain unclear. Findings are being discussed towards a possible review of the instruments measuring Internet addiction, as well as towards an approach of electronic media addiction from a different perspective with broader implications in therapeutic practice.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".