MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gender-Related Discourses as Mediators in the Association Between Internalization of the Thin-Body Ideal and Indicants of Body Dissatisfaction and Disordered Eating

2009· article· en· W2016419259 on OpenAlexaff
Todd G. Morrison, Emer E. Sheahan

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology of Women Quarterly · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyObjectificationMediationAssociation (psychology)InternalizationAngerEating disordersDisordered eatingSocial psychologyIdeal (ethics)Structural equation modelingHuman physical appearanceClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychotherapistMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined whether the gender-related discourses of self-objectification, self-silencing, and anger suppression mediated the association between internalization of the thin-body ideal and body dissatisfaction and eating pathology. We employed a cross-sectional design to study both university ( n = 140) and community ( n = 76) samples of women from Ireland ranging from 17 to 30 years of age ( M = 21.48, SD = 3.05). Structural equation modeling was used to test for mediation, with the final model suggesting that gender-related discourses (silencing the self/anger suppression and body surveillance) mediated the association between thin-body ideal internalization and attitudes and behaviors characteristic of disordered eating. Limitations of the current study and directions for future research are highlighted.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 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

Citations30
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology of Women QuarterlySame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207