MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W618322449

Borderline personality features as a moderator of the association of social rejection with impulsive behaviour

2013· dissertation· en· W618322449 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sean Butler

Bibliographic record

VenueSummit (Simon Fraser University) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSimon Fraser University
KeywordsModerationAssociation (psychology)PsychologyPersonalityBorderline personality disorderClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychotherapist
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary goal of this research was to examine whether borderline personality (BP) features moderate the effect of social rejection on impulsive behaviours.Previous research suggests that individuals with BPD report greater impulsiveness than nonpsychiatric controls and that following a fear induction, university students high in BP features engage in more impulsive responding than low BP individuals.In the present study, 77 individuals from a mixed community and undergraduate sample were randomly assigned to either listen to and visualize a social rejection scenario, or to sit through a neutral emotion induction.Impulsive responding was then measured in a passive avoidance learning task.Against prediction, BP features failed to moderate the relationship between assigned condition and the frequency of impulsive responses.This suggests that social rejection operates distinctly from other forms of negative emotional experience (e.g., fear) that have been shown to elicit more impulsive responding in individuals high in BP features.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSummit (Simon Fraser University)Same topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207