Emotionally Unavailable Parenting and Alexithymia: The Mediating Role of Attachment Insecurity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to explore whether attachment insecurity mediates the relationship between emotionally unavailable parenting and alexithymia in young adults. Methods and Materials: The study utilized a descriptive correlational design with a sample of 414 Turkish university students, determined based on the Krejcie and Morgan sample size table. Participants were selected through convenience sampling and completed three standardized self-report instruments: the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) to assess emotionally unavailable parenting, the Experiences in Close Relationships–Revised (ECR-R) to evaluate attachment insecurity, and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (TAS-20) to measure alexithymia. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 27 for descriptive and Pearson correlation analyses, while Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was performed using AMOS version 21 to test the hypothesized mediational model. Model fit was evaluated using multiple fit indices. Findings: Results indicated moderate to high levels of emotionally unavailable parenting (M = 56.42, SD = 8.37), attachment insecurity (M = 82.15, SD = 10.92), and alexithymia (M = 61.78, SD = 9.45). Pearson correlations revealed significant positive relationships among all variables: emotionally unavailable parenting and attachment insecurity (r = .58, p < .001), emotionally unavailable parenting and alexithymia (r = .53, p < .001), and attachment insecurity and alexithymia (r = .61, p < .001). SEM confirmed that attachment insecurity significantly mediated the relationship between emotionally unavailable parenting and alexithymia, with strong model fit indices (χ²/df = 2.12, CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.048). Conclusion: The findings highlight the pivotal role of attachment insecurity in linking emotionally unavailable parenting to alexithymia. These results emphasize the importance of enhancing emotional responsiveness in parenting to support healthier emotional development and attachment in young adults.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".