MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982919959 · doi:10.1177/1359105313483155

Body talk among undergraduate women: Why conversations about exercise and weight loss differentially predict body appreciation

2013· article· en· W1982919959 on OpenAlexaff
Louise Wasylkiw, Nicole A Butler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Psychology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsMount Allison University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyBody weightDevelopmental psychologyBody mass indexSocial psychologyMedicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Undergraduate women (N = 143) completed self-reports on exercise behavior, body orientation, body appreciation, and body-related talk. Results showed that conversations about weight loss/dieting and conversations about exercise differentially predicted body appreciation. Importantly, multiple regression analyses showed that the relationship between talk type and body appreciation was explained by the object-process dichotomy: Conversations about exercise oriented women to consider what their bodies can do which, in turn, predicted appreciation of one's body. In contrast, the relationship between conversations about weight loss/dieting and body appreciation was mediated by negative attitudes about one's body but not by an object orientation.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Health PsychologySame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207