The Relationship Between Childhood Traumas and Social Cognition Through Theory of Mind and Alexithymia in Bipolar Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the potential differences in childhood trauma (CT), theory of mind (ToM), a significant component of social cognition, and alexithymia in bipolar disorder (BD) patients and healthy controls. The study included 50 BD patients who met the study criteria and were under follow-up at our clinic along with 50 healthy controls. The two groups were matched for age, gender, and educational status. A sociodemographic questionnaire, Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ), Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS), Dokuz Eylul Theory of Mind Index (DEZIKO), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) were applied to all participants. The CTQ-Total, TAS total, and DEZIKO total scores were significantly higher in the BD group compared to the healthy group (p < .001). A significant positive correlation was identified between the TAS total score and CTQ physical neglect (r = 0.472, p = .001), CTQ emotional neglect (r = 0.449, p = .001) and CTQ total scores (r = 0.5, p < .001) in the BD group. A statistically significant negative correlation was identified between the DEZIKO faux pas score and the CTQ physical neglect score (r = -0.437, p = .002). BD patients had more adverse childhood experiences, lower ToM abilities despite being in remission, and more pronounced alexithymic personality features compared to healthy controls. We also identified a relationship between ToM, alexithymia, and adverse childhood experiences in BD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".