Preliminary investigation of objective and subjective experiences of relatives of individuals with hoarding behaviors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Families of individuals with hoarding symptoms report substantial burden; however, there has been no investigation of potential positive experiences. The objective of this study was to examine the experiences reported by individuals with a relative with elevated hoarding symptoms using a cross-sectional design. The current investigation expands on the literature in this area by incorporating a detailed interview of experiences in conjunction with validated measures of hoarding symptomology. METHODS: Twenty-nine adults with relatives with elevated hoarding symptoms completed self-report measures of hoarding severity for themselves and their relative and a clinician-administered assessment of their experiences with their family member with hoarding symptoms. RESULTS: Participants endorsed significant burden across a range of areas, including permanent changes in their daily routine. The majority (93%) of participants reported at least one positive experience, with 69% endorsing companionship as a benefit of the relationship. Greater symptom severity of the relative with hoarding symptoms was associated with greater subjective burden and decreased positive experiences. CONCLUSION: Our results add further evidence to the potential for interpersonal psychotherapy to lead to a reduction in hoarding symptomology.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".