Self-perception in early childhood: A comparative study of children with and without alexithymia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines differences in self-perception between children with alexithymia and their typically developing peers (TDP). It explores specific aspects of self-perception and compares self-perception profiles while considering gender and education. A total of 122 children from kindergartens and schools participated in the study, including 81 typically developing children and 41 with alexithymia. The study used the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and the Berkeley Puppet Interview (BPI) as assessment tools. The findings showed that alexithymia had a greater impact on self-perception than demographic factors like gender or education. Children with alexithymia had significantly lower self-perception in areas such as academic competence, motivation, social skills, and peer acceptance compared to their typically developing peers. The study highlights how alexithymia affects children's self-perception and calls for targeted interventions to support their well-being and social integration. It also suggests the need for further research into how educational environments influence children's self-perception.
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".