<i>OXTR</i> polymorphisms and parental bonding modulate alexithymia: The main effects and interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alexithymia is a subclinical personality disorder characterized by difficulties in identifying and expressing one's own emotion. Individual differences in alexithymia are influenced by both genetic and environmental factors. However, the interplay between these factors and their influences on alexithymia are unclear. Considering that oxytocin plays important roles in emotion processing and that parental bonding influences the development of alexithymia, we explored the associations between OXTR polymorphisms and alexithymia and examined whether the potential associations are moderated by parental bonding. To this end, we genotyped the OXTR polymorphisms (rs53576 and rs1042778) and scored alexithymia and parental bonding with the Toronto Alexithymia Scale and the Parental Bonding Instrument. Results indicated that: (1) the characteristics of alexithymia were negatively associated with parental care and positively with parental overprotection; (2) the OXTR rs53576 was significantly associated with the characteristics of alexithymia, such that the AA genotype was associated with fewer difficulties in identifying feelings and describing feelings than the AG/GG genotypes; and (3) the OXTR rs1042778 interacted with parental care in alexithymia with the vantage sensitivity model: the GG genotype was related to less severity of alexithymia than the AG/GG genotypes only in individuals with higher parental care. Overall, these findings suggest that the OXTR is related to alexithymia and that the quality of parental care influences the relationship. However, considering that the evidence from this study is weak, more research is needed to understand the roles of OXTR in alexithymia.
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".