MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Examining the Indirect Effects of Emotion Dysregulation between Interpersonal Trauma Endorsement and Impulsivity Facets

2024· preprint· en· W4402088972 on OpenAlexaff
Madison L. Straup, Ling Jin, Danica C. Slavish, Ateka A. Contractor

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpulsivitySensation seekingPsychologyClinical psychologyMediationFacet (psychology)Interpersonal communicationPsychiatryPersonalityBig Five personality traitsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives. Impulsivity is a common reaction following interpersonal trauma (IPT) experiences, such as physical and sexual assault. Research suggests emotion dysregulation (ED) explains the link between IPT and impulsivity. To advance this research, we assessed the indirect effects of ED on associations between physical/sexual assault endorsement and the five impulsivity facets (negative urgency, positive urgency, lack of premeditation, lack of perseverance, sensation seeking). Methods. A sample of 176 participants seeking treatment at a community mental health center [M age = 34.79; women = 52.8%] completed the scales on traumatic experiences, ED, and the five impulsivity facets. Five simple mediation models were conducted to examine the hypothesized indirect effects on each impulsivity facet. Results. Results revealed significant indirect effects of ED in associations between IPT endorsement and negative urgency (B =2.17, SE =0.58, 95% CI [1.09, 3.35]), positive urgency ( B =1.87, SE =0.59, 95% CI [0.84, 3.16]), lack of premeditation ( B =1.92, SE =0.58, 95% CI [0.89, 3.18]), lack of perseverance ( B =1.67, SE =0.49, 95% CI [0.79, 2.73]), and sensation seeking ( B =0.83, SE =0.36, 95% CI [0.20, 1.62]). Conclusion . ED explained the relationship between IPT endorsement and each of the five facets of impulsivity. IPT survivors may experience more ED, which may increase impulsivity. Findings help identify underlying factors that relate to survivors’ level of impulsivity following IPT experiences, as well as suggest trauma treatments targeting ED may be effective in reducing post-trauma impulsivity for these individuals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChild Abuse and Trauma→French-language works237,207→