Understanding loneliness: The roles of self- and interpersonal dysfunction and early parental indifference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many factors are implicated in developing and maintaining loneliness, including aspects of personality functioning and experience of early adverse childhood events. This study aimed to examine the relationship between domains of personality dysfunction, including self- and interpersonal functioning, and loneliness and determine whether such personality factors mediate the relationship between childhood parental indifference and loneliness. In total, 393 community-dwelling adults, mean age 34.3 (SD = 12.67), were recruited online for cross-sectional assessment of loneliness, personality functioning, big-five personality traits and perceived childhood parental indifference. Linear regression analyses were conducted followed by a parallel mediation model. Self- and interpersonal dysfunction were positively associated with loneliness and remained significant predictors of loneliness after controlling for five-factor personality traits. Impaired personality functioning accounted for 12% of loneliness variance. Finally, self-dysfunction mediated the relationship between childhood parental indifference and loneliness. Findings emphasize the importance of addressing personality functioning when developing psychosocial interventions aimed at tackling loneliness.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".