Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The Prevalence and Characteristics of Alexithymia in Adults Following Brain Injury: A Meta-Analysis

  • Review
  • Published:
Neuropsychology Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Alexithymia is the inability to identify and describe one’s own emotions. Some research suggests that organic alexithymia may occur after acquired brain injury (ABI). However, the results in the literature are inconsistent, when comparisons are made against healthy controls. Furthermore, a precise estimate of alexithymia prevalence in the ABI population has not yet been reported. Consequently, this meta–analysis aimed to estimate the prevalence and characteristics of alexithymia in ABI, as measured by the Toronto Alexithymia Scale–20 (TAS–20). Based on 22 unique ABI samples, a series of random-effects meta-analyses estimated moderate to large positive effect sizes (i.e., greater alexithymia in ABI samples) for the TAS–20 total scale (Hedges’ g = 1.00, 95% CI [0.75, 1.35]), as well as the subscales: difficulty identifying feelings (Hedges’ g = 0.92, 95% CI [0.66, 1.17]), difficulty describing feelings (Hedges’ g = 0.69, 95% CI [0.50, 0.87]) and externally oriented thinking (Hedges’ g = 0.75, 95% CI [0.64, 0.85]). Furthermore, a meta–regression identified a larger effect size (TAS–20 total scale score) for traumatic brain injury (TBI) samples, in comparison to non–TBI samples. Finally, the prevalence of clinically significant levels of alexithymia (TAS–20 total scale ≥ 68.4; i.e., two SDs above the general population mean) in ABI patients was estimated at 15.2%. We interpreted the results to suggest that ABI may have a substantial negative impact on affective processing abilities and, thus, comprehensive assessment of emotional functioning deficits following ABI should be considered by practitioners.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We note that the literature search did not identify empirical studies that utilized other measures of alexithymia and met the inclusion criteria.

  2. We use the term “clinical alexithymia” in this manuscript, not because we believe a particular score from a questionnaire can validly diagnose a psychological condition, but because it is common practice in the literature to use such a term, in this context (i.e., a specified high value on the TAS-20).

  3. Supplementary leave-one-out robustness analyses were conducted and when Wood et al., 2014 was excluded, almost identical effect sizes were yielded for the total scale (g = 0.99, 95% CI [0.73, 1.25]), and subscales: DIF (g = 0.89, 95% CI [0.63, 1.16]), DDF (g = 0.68, 95% CI [0.48, 0.87]) and EOT (g = 0.74, 95% CI [0.63, 0.86]).

  4. Supplementary meta–analyses for DIF, DDF, EOT and TS were conducted with the control sample data reported in the individual papers (see Table S3 supplementary section). However, of the included papers, six did not include any control data. Consequently, Parker et al. (2003) norms (i.e., N = 1933/6) were used for those six papers. Numerically, these supplementary meta–analyses yielded somewhat larger effect sizes for DIF (g = 1.02, p < .001, 95% CI [0.75, 1.23], DDF (g = 0.77, p < .001, 95% CI [0.53, 1.01], and TS (g = 1.16, p < .001, 95% CI [0.74, 1.57], and a numerically smaller effect size for EOT (g = 0.66, p < .001, 95% CI [0.49, 0.84], in comparison to the meta–analyses that used the Parker et al. (2003) control sample norms exclusively. Overall, the effect sizes were comparable across the two series of meta–analyses.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gilles E. Gignac.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 127 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fynn, D.M., Gignac, G.E., Becerra, R. et al. The Prevalence and Characteristics of Alexithymia in Adults Following Brain Injury: A Meta-Analysis. Neuropsychol Rev 31, 722–738 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-021-09484-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-021-09484-6

Keywords

Navigation