MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111250629 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2020.581390

Words Don't Come Easy: How Male Prisoners' Difficulties Identifying and Discussing Feelings Relate to Suicide and Violence

2020· article· en· W3111250629 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Laura Hemming, Peer Bhatti, Gillian Haddock, Daniel Pratt

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research Council CanadaMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsAlexithymiaFeelingPsychologyPrisonThematic analysisHarmSuicidal ideationClinical psychologySuicide preventionQualitative researchSocial psychologyPoison controlMedicineCriminologyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Suicide and violence are prevalent within male prisons in the UK. It has been suggested that alexithymia may be associated with both suicide and violence. Alexithymia can be defined as an inability to identify or discuss emotions. The present study aimed to qualitatively explore male prisoners' experiences of alexithymia and how these experiences may relate to suicide and violence. Fifteen male prisoners were recruited from two prisons in the North West of England. All participants had experienced suicidal and/or violent thoughts and/or behaviors in the past 3 months, and all screened positive on an established measure of alexithymia. Participants took part in a qualitative interview during which they were also given the opportunity to provide drawings of their emotions. Data were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis, with a collaborative approach taken between researchers and an individual with lived experience of residing in prison. The results indicated that male prisoners tended not to talk about their emotions with others, due to external pressures of residing in prison in addition to internal difficulties with recognizing and articulating emotions. Not discussing emotions with others was associated with a build-up of emotions which could result in either an emotional overload or an absence of emotions. Both experiences were perceived to be associated with hurting self or others, however, participants also identified a "safety valve" where it was acknowledged that using more adaptive approaches to releasing emotions could prevent harm to self and others. These findings suggest three main clinical implications; (1) a cultural shift in male prisons is needed which encourages open communication of emotions (2) individualized support is needed for those identified as experiencing a difficulty in recognizing and articulating emotions and (3) prison staff should encourage alternative ways of releasing emotions such as by using harm minimization or distraction techniques.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychiatrySame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207