Üniversite Öğrencilerinde Çocukluk Çağı Travmaları, Aleksitimi ve Duygu Düzenleme Güçlüğü Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between childhood traumas, alexithymia and difficulty in emotion regulation in university students. Relational screening model was used in the research. The sample group of the study consists of 351 university students. 83.5% of the participants (n = 293) were women and 16.5% (n = 63) were men. Informed Voluntary Consent Form, Sociodemographic Information Form, Childhood Trauma Scale, Toronto Alexithymia Scale and Emotion Regulation Scale Short-Form were administered to the participants. Data collection was carried out online (Google Forms) through convenient sampling. Spearman Correlation Analysis and Simple Linear Regression Analysis were performed to examine the relationship and effect between non-parametric tests and sociodemographic characteristics, childhood traumas, alexithymia and emotion regulation difficulties, by looking at the normality curves in the data analysis. As a result of the research findings, a significant and positive relationship was found between the childhood traumas, alexithymia and emotion regulation difficulties of university students. In addition, it was determined that male individuals are more alexithymic than females, females are exposed to sexual abuse more than males, 24-25 age group has more difficulty in emotion regulation, and the rate of emotion regulation and alexithymia is low in the presence of a romantic relationship. It is thought that this study can contribute to the relevant literature. It is thought that the results obtained from the study will contribute to the field of clinical practice and the relevant literature. Keywords: Alexithymia, childhood traumas, difficulty in emotion regulation
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".