Reality Therapy Effect on Alexithymia and Posttraumatic Growth in Women With Love Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Losing a love relationship in youth creates one of the most significant impacts that may occur for women, as they have been introduced to love trauma syndrome for the first time. This research study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of reality therapy in decreasing alexithymia and increasing posttraumatic growth among women who have experienced a love failure. Methods: This study was quasi-experimental research using a pre-test-post-test design with a follow-up. The statistical population comprised all women with emotional failure experiences referred to Aramandish and Chaman clinics in Tehran City, Iran, during 2021 and 2022. A purposive sampling method was used to select the samples. Thirty people were chosen as the study sample; 15 women were put in the experimental (reality therapy) group and 15 in the control group. The reality therapy intervention plan was applied to the experimental group in eight 90-minute sessions once a week, while the control group did not receive any intervention. The Toronto alexithymia scale and posttraumatic growth inventory were implemented before and after intervention sessions. Finally, the data were analyzed for variance analysis with repeated measurements and analysis of covariance using SPSS software, version 26. Results: The findings showed that after comparing the post-test and follow-up scores with the pre-test results, there is a significant difference between alexithymia (P<0.001) and posttraumatic growth (P<0.001). Likewise, a significant difference (P<0.001) in the research variables was observed between the experimental and control groups in all three measurement times. Conclusion: The findings showed that reality therapy had a significant effect on alexithymia and posttraumatic growth of women with emotional failure. Therefore, reality therapy can be used for emotional failure syndromes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".