MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390672542 · doi:10.4081/ripppo.2023.709

The catcher in the mind: validation of the brief-mentalized affectivity scale for adolescents in the Italian population

2024· article· en· W4390672542 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marianna Liotti, Alice Fiorini Bincoletto, Fabiola Bizzi, Marta Tironi, Simone Charpentier Mora, Donatella Cavanna, Guido Giovanardi, Elliot Jurist, Anna Maria Speranza, Vittorio Lingiardi, Annalisa Tanzilli

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in Psychotherapy Psychopathology Process and Outcome · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyNegative affectivityConstruct (python library)AlexithymiaConstruct validityMentalizationScale (ratio)PopulationClinical psychologyToronto Alexithymia ScaleDevelopmental psychologyInterpersonal communicationSocial psychologyPsychometricsPersonalityMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of mentalized affectivity (MA) encompasses the dimensions of identifying, processing, and expressing emotions and describes the process of making sense of and reevaluating one's affects in light of autobiographical memory. This construct was developed within the theoretical framework of mentalization and, due to its interpersonal nature, added further complexity to the emotion regulation construct. This research aimed to examine the factor structure and psychometric properties of the Brief-Mentalized Affectivity Scale for adolescents (B-MAS-A) on an Italian sample of young people (aged 13-19 years). Data were collected using non-probabilistic sampling and an online survey. Participants were asked to complete a large battery of instruments, including the B-MAS-A, the Toronto Alexithymia Scale, the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire, the Epistemic Trust, Mistrust, and Credulity Questionnaire, the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, and the General Self-Efficacy Scale. In study 1, factor analyses carried out on a total sample of 566 adolescents identified 3 distinct dimensions of the same components of MA found in the adult population: i) identifying; ii) processing; iii) expressing emotions. The subscales showed excellent internal consistency. Study 2 (involving a subsample of 288 participants) demonstrated good levels of construct and criterion validity. These results confirm that the B-MAS-A represents a valid and robust instrument for assessing the complex and multifaceted characteristics of MA in adolescents. The B-MAS-A can make a significant contribution to clinical practice and research and encourage systematic studies on MA in psychotherapy, taking into account the developmental stage of adolescence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.382 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in Psychotherapy Psychopathology Process and OutcomeSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207