Examining the Relationship between Emotion Regulation, Alexithymia, and Perceived Stress in Women with Breast Cancer Mediated by Perceived Social Support
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aims to determine the relationship between emotion regulation, Alexithymia, and perceived stress in women with breast cancer, with the mediation of perceived social support.This study is both descriptive and correlational in nature, as it is based on the subject matter and its objectives.The statistical population of this research consists of women with breast cancer in Sari County in 2023 who were undergoing treatment.Due to accessibility conditions, 127 participants were selected using purposive sampling.Data were collected using the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire by Garnefski and Kraaij (2006), the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (1994), the Perceived Stress Scale by Cohen (1983), and the Perceived Social Support Scale by Zimet (1988).The data were then analyzed using regression analysis in larger dimensions (path analysis) using SPSS and Smart PLS software.The results indicated that there is a significant positive relationship between emotion regulation, Alexithymia, and perceived stress in women with breast cancer, mediated by perceived social support (p < 0.05), thus accepting the main hypothesis of the research.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".