Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alexithymia is characterized by: difficulty with identifying, distinguishing, and describing affect; restricted imaginal capacity; externally oriented thinking tendency. This study examines its validity among Chinese Canadians and possible acculturation influences. Two hundred Chinese Canadian primary care patients completed English or Chinese version of: Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20, Psychological Mindedness Scale, Emotional Expressivity Scale, NEO-FFI, somatic symptom scale, Chinese Depression Inventory, and BDI. Using confirmatory factor analysis to examine the factor structure of TAS-20, fit indices indicated a near adequate fit to previously identified three-factor model. All except three items loaded significantly on to their respective factors. TAS-20 correlated positively with Neuroticism, CDI, BDI, and somatic symptoms, and negatively with PMS, EES, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Education and identification with Chinese culture were associated with decreased alexithymia. The results support the cross-cultural validity of alexithymia and TAS-20 among the Chinese. An association between Chinese cultural identification and increased alexithymia was not supported.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| 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".