MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of Fitness Advertising on Weight and Body Shape Dissatisfaction, Social Physique Anxiety, and Exercise Motives in a Sample of Healthy‐Weight Females

2009· article· en· W1905691934 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Biobehavioral Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyBody weightAnxietyTest (biology)Physical fitnessAdvertisingClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPhysical therapyMedicinePsychiatryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of exposure to fitness advertising on multiple dimensions of female body image were explored. Healthy weight females ( N = 185) were randomly assigned to a model‐focused, product‐focused, or control group and completed body image inventories during a pre‐test and following exposure to fitness advertising 1 week later. There were no significant main effects for group or time on any body image measures. A group by time interaction was observed for affective body image, F (1, 179) = 45.52, p < .001, η 2 = .32. Females exposed to model‐focused fitness advertising reported higher social physique anxiety compared with females in the other groups. These findings suggest that multidimensional body image perspectives are informative, especially when examining the effects of media advertising.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.359 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it