MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003549903 · doi:10.1080/08952841.2012.638873

“Yes, I worry about my weight … but for the most part I'm content with my body”: Older Women's Body Dissatisfaction Alongside Contentment

2012· article· en· W2003549903 on OpenAlexaff
Toni Liechty

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Women & Aging · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContentmentWorryPsychologyFocus groupPerceptionHuman physical appearanceSocial psychologyGerontologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The majority of body image research has studied younger women and girls, ignoring older age groups. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to explore body image among retirement-age women. The sample included 13 women aged 60 to 69. Data collection occurred in two phases. Participants completed individual in-depth interviews and attended follow-up focus groups. Transcripts from both phases of data collection were analyzed thematically using the constant comparison method. Themes emerged regarding the participants' definitions of body image, their attitudes about appearance, and their current perceptions of their bodies. Findings highlighted the complexity of older women's body image as characterized by the dual existence of contentment and desire for physical change. Participants offered explanations for this seeming contradiction, including consideration of age, prioritization of preferred aspects of the body or the self, and focus on aspects of appearance that are perceived to be within the individual's control.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations66
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Women & AgingSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207