Mediation role of alexithymia, sensory processing sensitivity and emotional-mental processes between childhood trauma and adult psychopathology: a self-report study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is overwhelming evidence for a strong association between childhood trauma and adult psychopathology. This study aimed to investigate the mediation roles of alexithymia, sensory processing sensitivity, and emotional-mental processes in the relationship between childhood traumas and adult psychopathology. METHODS: The sample consisted of 337 people (78.9% female, 21.1% male) aged between 20 and 64 years. Participants filled the scales online via a Google form. Reading Mind in the Eyes (EYES), Sensory Processing Sensitivity Scale (SPS), Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-26), Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ), and the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) were used. PROCESS (Model 4) macro was used to examine the mediating role of sensory processing sensitivity, alexithymia, and the EYES test results in the relationship between childhood trauma and psychopathology. RESULTS: The results of mediation analysis demonstrated that sensory processing sensitivity and alexithymia mediated the relationship between childhood trauma and adult psychopathology. However, the EYES test (mentalization) did not mediate in this relationship. CONCLUSION: This study shows that childhood traumas may relate to more psychological symptoms in individuals with high sensory processing sensitivity and alexithymia. Our study may contribute to the understanding of what may lead to a person's vulnerability to experiencing psychological symptoms after childhood trauma. It may be crucial that future treatment and intervention programs should include sensory sensitivity and alexithymia. Sensory processing sensitivity and alexithymia can be examined in the treatment of psychological problems of individuals who have experienced childhood trauma.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".