MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099350265 · doi:10.1521/jscp.2009.28.7.909

Weight-Related Teasing Increases Eating in Binge Eaters

2009· article· en· W2099350265 on OpenAlex
Cheryl D. Aubie, Josée L. Jarry

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

VenueJournal of Social and Clinical Psychology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMoodBinge eatingVignetteAffect (linguistics)Developmental psychologyCompetence (human resources)Clinical psychologyEating disordersSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two experimental studies investigated the impact of weight-related teasing on mood and eating in binge and nonbinge eaters. In Study 1, all participants who read a vignette depicting weight-related teasing experienced increased negative affect, but only binge eaters proceeded to eat more following this mood change. Study 2 investigated the specificity of the weight content of the teasing by also examining the effect of competence-related teasing on mood and eating. Negative affect generally increased whether participants read the weight-related or the competence-related teasing vignette. However, binge eaters ate more only when exposed to the weight-related teasing vignette. The affect regulation model and escape theory are used to discuss the specificity of the effect of weight related teasing on binge eaters' eating behavior.

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)0.001
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 score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.384 · 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