The casual model of relationship between alexithymia and sexual function by mediating rule of psychological distress and marital intimacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to exam the causal model of relationship between alexithymia and sexual function by mediating rule of psychological distress and marital intimacy among married women. The method of present study was a descriptive (non-experimental) and correlation research design as structural equation modeling. The statistical population of the study were includes all married women referring to the health centers of the city of Bardsir. Based on available sampling method, 506 people were selected as sample, and answered the Toronto alexithymia Scale, the gender index of sexual function, intimacy need and of psychological distress indicator questionnaires. The findings of structural model showed that alexithymia had a positive effect on psychological distress (0.75), and negative effect on marital intimacy (0.22), as well as psychological distress had a negative effect on sexual function (-0.25), but marital intimacy had a positive effect (0.34) on sexual function. Also, the indirect effect of alexithymia on sexual functioning was negative (-0.22) due to psychological distress and marital intimacy’s mediatory rule. The results of the present study were showed that the examined model was fitted to proposed conceptual model. And also the mediate rule of psychological distress and marital intimacy among alexithymia and sexual function were proved.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".