The Mediating Role of Self-Concept in the Relationship Between Attachment Insecurity and Identity Differentiation Among Women with an Eating Disorder
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to test structural relationships among developmentally-based factors, such as attachment anxiety and avoidance, and self-concept, which may lead to varying levels of identity differentiation among eating disordered women. We tested a model in which self-concept mediates the relationship between attachment insecurity and differentiation of self among eating disordered women. The sample consisted of 330 women with eating disorders who were referred to an eating disorders treatment program for assessment. Individuals completed self-report questionnaires at intake. Results indicated that higher attachment avoidance was associated with lower identity differentiation indirectly through poorer self-concept. In addition, higher attachment anxiety was directly related to lower differentiation of self, and higher attachment anxiety was also indirectly associated with lower identity differentiation through poorer self-concept. Results are consistent with a developmentally-based theory that suggests attachment dimensions rooted in early family experiences have an impact upon the quality of one's self-concept, which in turn directly impacts on one's identity. Targeting attachment avoidance or anxiety when treating women with eating disorders may result in improved self concepts and more differentiated identities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it