Features of Emotional Intelligence, Empathy and Alexithymia in Persons Dependent on Psychoactive Substances with Different Experiences of Their Use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The research is aimed at identifying the specifics of the components of emotional intelligence (EQ) in persons with different experiences of substance abuse. The study involved 157 respondents aged 35 to 45 years, of whom 111 were dependent on psychoactive substances and 46 never used them. The empirical study was carried out using The Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (EmIn) by D.V. Lyusin, The Balanced Emotional Empathy Scale (BEES) by A. Mehrabian and N. Epstein, and The Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS). Significant differences were found for almost all the variables (except for empathy and the ‘intrapersonal management’ EQ component) between the group of persons who did not use psychoactive substances and the groups of persons dependent on such substances. The obtained results also make it possible to speak about differences in the correlations between the components of emotional intelligence with each other, as well as with empathy and alexithymia among the groups of subjects with different experiences of substance abuse. In individuals who did not use psychoactive substances, all the components of emotional intelligence are interconnected. In the addicts, as the duration of substance abuse increases, the number of connections between the components of emotional intelligence, both among themselves and with alexithymia, decreases.
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".