Mentalization, emotional arousal and readiness to gather information in the context of an ongoing relational rupture
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
The ability to openly consider the mental states of others has been termed mentalizing and is crucial to maintaining interpersonal relationships. Theory and previous research findings suggest that emotional arousal may impact mentalization. This study examined whether the arousal associated with a relational rupture impacted young adults' ability to mentalize about their family member with whom they were in conflict. Fifty-four young adults were interviewed about an ongoing conflict with a significant family member. Average heart rate, skin conductance, and level of mentalization were measured at the speech-turn level. Results showed a curvilinear association between mean heart rate and reflective functioning (RF). No effects were found for skin conductance. Logistic regression showed RF scores predicted participants' readiness to engage in information gathering. Moderate emotional arousal was associated with higher RF, and those with higher RF were nearly twice as likely to be ready to gather new information from the other.
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 | 0.001 | 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