The Mediating Role of Alexithymia in the Relationship Between Anxiety and Trauma Responses in Adolescents During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: This study aims to evaluate the anxiety levels, trauma reactions, alexithymia levels and coping strategies of adolescents previously diagnosed with an anxiety disorder (AD) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Trauma reactions were assessed using the Children’s Impact of Event Scale(Cries-13) and childhood anxiety disorders were identified using the Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders(Scared). Alexithymia levels were assessed using the Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (Tas-20). According to this scale, the sample was classified as alexithymic group if the total score was ≥52 and as non-alexithymic group if the total score was ≤ 51. Adolescents’ coping strategies were assessed using the Turkish version of the Kidcope (Kidcope-T). Results: The alexithymic group scored higher than the non-alexithymic group on the Cries-13, Scared, Kidcope avoidant coping and Kidcope negative coping subscales. Tas-20 scores were associated with Scared and Cries-13 scores, as well as with Kidcope scores, in adolescents diagnosed with AD. Mediation analysis revealed that alexithymia fully mediated the relationship between the Cries-13 and Scared scores. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that alexithymia is associated with anxiety and trauma responses, and that it may play a mediating role in the development of psychopathologies. The findings suggest that interventions targeting alexithymia and maladaptive coping behaviors could help to reduce the negative psychological effects of the pandemic. In clinical practice, assessing alexithymia could inform treatment approaches.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".