Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36874875›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023

Driven or lacking access: Integration types as a subdimension of the affect consciousness construct.

Astrid Gravdal Vølstad, Maria Ingunnsdatter Salas, Ole André Solbakken

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Astrid Gravdal VølstadDepartment of Social Sciences and History, Volda University College, Volda, Norway.
Maria Ingunnsdatter SalasDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Ole André SolbakkenDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: This article examines integration types as a sub-dimension of the affect consciousness construct to account for individual differences in how problems with the experience and expression of affects manifest. The two integration types driven and lack of access describe prototypical ways of experiencing and expressing affect, differentiating between problems characterized by too much or too little affective mobilization. Methods: Archival data from a non-clinical sample (n = 157) was used to examine the validity and reliability of integration type scales from the Affect Integration Inventory (AII 2.0). Internal structure was assessed through confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) by structural equation modelling. Nomological validity was examined through tests of patterns of hypothesized associations between integration types across various affects and specific types of interpersonal problems (as measured by the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems; IIP-64). Results: CFAs indicated acceptable fit for the different integration type scales and overall construct structure. Distinct sinusoidal patterns of correlations between integration types and interpersonal problems were found for the various affects examined. All correlation patterns had good fit (GoF ≥ 0.87), with significant differences in magnitude between peak and low point correlations. Discussion: We conclude that differences in prototypical ways of experiencing and expressing affects can be assessed easily, quickly, and reliably, have theoretically consistent intra-domain relationships and valid structural psychometric properties, are robustly related to interpersonal functioning in general, and are systematically and differentially related to specific and theoretically hypothesized interpersonal problem types.

Indexed as

affect integrationaffective functioningassessmentconstruct validationemotion regulationindividual differencesintegration typesinterpersonal problems

Identifiers

PMID36874875
PMCPMC9977065

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.