Alexithymia and Internet Addiction in Children: Meaning in Life as Mediator and Reciprocal Filial Piety as Moderator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To explore the psychological mechanism between alexithymia and Internet addiction, the present study constructed a moderated mediation model based on the problem behavior theory. Methods: =1.10) were surveyed using the 20-item Toronto-alexithymia-scale, meaning in life questionnaire, dual filial piety scale, and Internet addiction disorder diagnostic scale. Results: First, alexithymia was significantly negatively correlated with meaning in life and reciprocal filial piety, and positively correlated with Internet addiction; meaning in life was significantly positively correlated with reciprocal filial piety, and negatively correlated with Internet addiction; reciprocal filial piety was significantly positively correlated with authoritarian filial piety, and negatively correlated with Internet addiction. Second, alexithymia could not only directly predict Internet addiction, but also indirectly predict Internet addiction through meaning in life. Third, reciprocal filial piety played a moderating role between meaning in life and Internet addiction, while authoritarian filial piety did not. For middle school students with low reciprocal filial piety, meaning in life can negatively predict Internet addiction; for those with high reciprocal filial piety, there is no correlation between meaning in life and Internet addiction. Conclusion: This study reveals the internal mechanism of the relationship between alexithymia and Internet addiction in middle school students, emphasizes the role of positive psychology and family environment, and provides specific evidence and theoretical guidance for preventing Internet addiction in middle school students.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".