Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data were collected from 659 Chinese university students (aged 17–23) using validated Chinese versions of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire-Short Form (CTQ-SF), Experiences in Close Relationships inventory (ECR), Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), and Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI-C) to assess childhood emotional neglect(CEN), attachment anxiety(AA), alexithymia(AL), and cognitive empathy(CE), respectively. We propose four sequentially progressive hypotheses: childhood emotional neglect directly impairs cognitive empathy; this relationship is mediated by individual attachment anxiety; it is also mediated by alexithymia; crucially, attachment anxiety and alexithymia constitute a sequential mediating pathway, whereby childhood emotional neglect first leads to heightened attachment anxiety, which in turn exacerbates an individual's alexithymia, ultimately significantly impairing their cognitive empathy capacity.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.039 | 0.053 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.084 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".