Essential Characteristics and Diagnostic Technique of Psychological Types of Love
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper is aimed at theoretical insight into phenomenology of psychological manifestations of love styles, identified by J. A. Lee, the Canadian sociologist, who used types of love described by ancient Greek philosophers as a basis for his classification. The author employs a number of aspects as the criteria for the analysis of essential characteristics of love styles: differentially expressed features of feelings, self-awareness, social perception, types of human relationships (suggested by J. L. Moreno and M. Buber), ways of realization of inward human nature (described by E. S. Fromm), level of sense of community and compensation mechanism for inferiority feeling (conceptualized by A. Adler). As a result of the theoretical study, the author outlined six psychological types of love: passionate love-admiration (eros), hedonistic love (ludus), love-friendship (storge), practical love (pragma), obsessive love (mania), altruistic love (agape). Theoretical representations of psychological types of love, formulated upon carrying out the phenomenological analysis, and application of substantive deductive construction strategy for psychological inventories enabled the author to design a diagnostic technique for psychological types of love. To test the technique, the author conducted the empirical study that involved 143 participants (89 women and 54 men) aged 18–32 (mean age = 22). The paper gives the reliability indicators for six scales of the diagnostic technique for the psychological types of love and the results of its convergent validation that prove good psychometric applicability of the designed psychodiagnostic tools and their differential diagnostic potential. The study revealed correlations of degree of psychological types of love with some sustainable personality traits (R. B. Cattell’s technique) and indicators of social and psychological adaptability.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it