MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082307666 · doi:10.1080/0887044031000148246

Positive and negative body-related comments and their relationship with body dissatisfaction in middle-aged women

2004· article· en· W2082307666 on OpenAlex
Lindsay McLaren, Diana Kuh, Rebecca Hardy, Lise Gauvin

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology and Health · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyBody weightSelf-esteemDevelopmental psychologyDemographyLower bodyClinical psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the relationship between body-related comments recalled across the life span and current body esteem among 898 54-year-old female participants from the MRC National Survey of Health and Development. A significant effect of negative comments while growing up, which was independent of comments from partner, suggests an enduring adverse impact of these early comments on midlife body esteem. There was no evidence that the detrimental effect of negative comments recalled while growing up could be reversed by compliments from one's partner. Partner comments (positive or negative) had a greater impact on the body esteem of thinner women and of women who had received positive comments while growing up. Results suggest that an impact of social feedback on body esteem is not restricted to young samples, and that comments received in adulthood (and not just during childhood or adolescence) should be taken into account.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.319 · 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