Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39540074›Full record

ArticleClinical neuropsychiatry2024

Alexithymia: A Defense of the Original Conceptualization of the Construct and a Critique of the Attention-Appraisal Model.

Graeme J Taylor, Piero Porcelli, R Michael Bagby

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical neuropsychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. How alexithymia shapes functional networks: Insights from a general population study.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Psychological Treatments for Alexithymia: A Systematic Review.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  18. Article
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.

Graeme J TaylorDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Canada.
Piero PorcelliDepartment of Psychological, Health, and Territorial Sciences, University of Chieti, Italy.
R Michael BagbyDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Our goal was to compare the original conceptualization of the alexithymia construct with the attention-appraisal model, focusing primarily on the removal of the reduced imaginal activity component, a seminal aspect of the construct in the original model. We also examined associations between alexithymia and emotional distress and emotion regulation, attachment, and trauma, and whether alexithymia is a transdiagnostic risk factor. We discuss differences between the models in the treatment of alexithymia and also differences in measurement. Method: We conducted a narrative review of the scientific literature validating the original model of alexithymia and examined the comparatively few empirical studies evaluating the attention-appraisal model. Articles describing contemporary theoretical ideas about the relationship between imagination and emotion were reviewed, as well as studies exploring associations between alexithymia and imaginal activity. Results: The attention-appraisal model of alexithymia is theoretically derived and examined empirically in studies using correlation/measurement-based methods that employed self-report measures with mostly non-clinical samples and conducted primarily by researchers led by developers of the model. The original model of alexithymia is derived from observations of patients in clinical settings; its validity is supported by findings from hundreds of empirical investigations spanning nearly four decades with nonclinical and a variety of clinical samples using both correlation-based and experimental studies and methods of measurement other than self-report, and by independent teams of researchers. The reduced imaginal activity component of the alexithymia construct is mostly supported by these studies. Conclusions: Because of the dearth of studies with clinical samples, the absence of investigations by independent researchers, and the limited range of methods and measurements to evaluate and assess the model, there is insufficient evidence to warrant removal of the imaginal activity component of the alexithymia construct and for replacing the original conceptualization of the construct with the attention-appraisal model.

Indexed as

alexithymiaattachmentattention-appraisal modelemotion and imaginationemotion regulationtrauma

Identifiers

PMID39540074
PMCPMC11555664

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.