Alexitimia como predictor directo y mediado por la depresión en la violencia de pareja
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on intra-couple violence has traditionally focused on women as victims and men as aggressors when violence is often reciprocal between both members of the couple. Alexithymia is a potential risk factor for intra-couple violence due to its usually associated characteristics of insecure attachment, passive coping style, empathy deficit and emotional control difficulties. Alexithymia has been found to be closely related to depression. Taking into account this background, the aim of this paper was to study the relationship between alexithymia and suffered and exerted violence among men and women with heterosexual partners, controlling for depression. The Spanish questionnaire on suffered and exerted couple violence (Cuestionario de Violencia Sufrida y Ejercida de Pareja, CVSE, Moral de la Rubia & Ramos Basurto, 2015), the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20, Bagby, Par-ker & Taylor, 1994, in its Mexican version, Moral de la Rubia, 2008a) and the Beck Depression Inventory (2nd Ed., BDI-2, Beck, Steer & Brown, 1996, in its simplified Mexican application format, IDB-2-FSA; Moral de la Rubia, 2013) were administrated to a non-random sample of 240 participants (120 female and 120 male). Alexithymia correlated to violence, more to suffered violence than exerted violence, more to damage than frequency within su-ffered violence, and more to frequency than damage within exerted violence. Most of these correlations remained significant after controlling for depression. In a model with a close fit to the data in the total sample, alexithymia had a significant effect on suffered and exerted violence, and this effect was both directly and indirectly mediated by depression. It is concluded that alexithymia is primordially a risk factor for suffering violence from the partner and to a much lesser extent to perpetrating violence against the partner.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".