Alexithymia and bullying behavior in students
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Bullying behavior among students has become a severe problem that affects their mental and physical well-being. The factors that cause bullying behavior are very complex and involve various aspects. One factor that is receiving increasing attention is alexithymia.Purpose: This study explores the relationship between alexithymia and student bullying behavior.Methods: The research used a quantitative design with a cross-sectional study approach. The research sample consisted of 120 class X students at Senior High School X in Bandung, selected using a total sampling technique. Data was collected by distributing online questionnaires, including the Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (TAS-20) to measure alexithymia and the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire for bullying behavior. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the Spearman correlation test.Results: The data obtained show that less than half of the respondents (36.7%) experienced high levels of alexithymia, 38.3% likely experienced possible alexithymia, and 25% did not experience alexithymia, while the majority of respondents exhibited high bullying behavior (43.5%). This study shows a positive relationship between alexithymia and student bullying behavior (p <0.0001; r: 0.309).Conclusion: Alexithymia can increase bullying behavior in school children. The higher the level of alexithymia, the greater the tendency to engage in bullying behavior.
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.
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 it