Psychological Functioning, Defense Strategies and the Contribution of Perceived Family Collaboration in Adolescents Who Experienced Multiple Motor Vehicle Crashes: A Descriptive Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescents frequently experience motor vehicle collisions (MVCs). Research has mostly underlined the psychological outcomes, rather than adolescents' general emotional-behavioral functioning and the role played by family. This study aims to explore the emotional-behavioral functioning, measured with the Youth Self Report (YSR), difficulties to identify and describe emotions, measured with the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), the use of defense strategies, measured with the Response Evaluation Measure for Youth (REM-71), and perceived family collaboration, measured with the Perceived Collective Family scale, in adolescents that have experienced more than three MVCs in a year. N = 150 adolescents who visited an emergency department for MVCs were assessed through self-report questionnaires. Adolescents showed difficulties to identify and describe their emotions and a massive use of defense strategies. Moreover, lower perceived family collaboration predicted adolescents' alexithymic traits and the massive use of maladaptive defense strategies. These results may be useful in assessing and creating prevention programs for risky driving behaviors in adolescence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".