Neural correlates of viewing photographs of one’s own body and another woman’s body in anorexia and bulimia nervosa: an fMRI study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In spite of many similarities in the psychopathology of anorexia nervosa (AN) and bulimia nervosa (BN), the 2 groups seem to differ in terms of body image disturbances. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare neuronal correlates of viewing photographs of one's own body and another woman's body in patients with these forms of eating disorders as well as controls. METHODS: We performed functional magnetic resonance imaging while women with AN (n = 13), BN (n = 15) and healthy controls (n = 27) viewed 16 standardized pictures of their own body and another woman's body, taken while the participants were wearing a bikini. RESULTS: When viewing their own body, participants with AN and BN showed reduced activity in the inferior parietal lobule compared with healthy women. In response to looking at another woman's body, participants with AN had higher amygdala activity than did those in the BN and control groups. LIMITATIONS: The generalizability of the results is limited by the small sample size. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest decreased attentional processes in AN and BN toward one's own body, possibly reflecting body-related avoidance behaviour. Enhanced limbic activity elicited by looking at another woman's body in participants with AN might be a neural correlate of stronger emotional activation and enhanced vigilance, possibly resulting from social comparison processes. Our study reveals hints about body image-associated alterations in brain activity, which seem to be more pronounced among women with AN than among those with BN.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".