Associations between Intimate Partner Violence, Dysfunctional Attachment Style and Alexithymia at Women Displaying Somatoform Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a major reason of concern worldwide. This study aimed to investigate the associations between alexithymia, dysfunctional attachment style and somatoform disorders (SD) at women victims of IPV. Methods. 40 female patients (mean age=41.55, standard deviation=10.33) with a history of IPV, confirmed through the Women Abuse Screening Tool (WAST) were compared to a control group (n=40, mean age=43.90, standard deviation=8.30). All participants were administered the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) for alexithymia, the Adult Attachment Scale (AAS), the WAST test and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-15) for SD. t-tests, Pearson’s correlations and MANOVA were used to test the significance of group differences. Results. Women victims of IPV had higher scores in alexithymia and SD (p<.001) compared to controls. SD correlated highly to IPV (r=.537, p<.001) and moderately (r=.349-|.449, p<.001) to attachment styles. Alexithymia correlated highly to IPV(r=.633, p<.001). The MANOVA analysis displayed an important influence of IPV on various components of alexithymia and on SD. This influence is distinct, and almost exclusively independent of the attachment style. Conclusions. IPV is a significant risk factor for alexithymia and SD.This supports the need for early psychological interventions in IPV, addressing the cognitive and emotional components of IPV.
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) | 0.001 | 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".