Actual and Possible Body-Image Self-Schemas in Young Women with Bulimic Tendencies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To examine whether information about body image is processed and cognitively organized around a self-concept, two experiments analyzed reaction time and memory for 48 young women with bulimic tendencies. Information was self-referencing to body shape vs trait words and information processing of adjectives referenced to "I dream of" and "I am afraid of" facets of self. Bulimic subjects encoded "fat" adjectives faster when these words were referenced to the present self. Reaction times were also faster to both "thin" and "fat" adjectives when these words were self-referenced to an "I dream of" and to an "I am afraid of" self, respectively. Processing of body-image information depended on which facet of self was activated rather than on the denotative meaning of the stimulus words. Memory for thin and fat adjectives was not related to preoccupation with body image or to which facet of the self was invoked. Findings suggest that an actual body-image schema and a possible body-image schema could coexist for bulimic persons. Such coexistence is necessary for a theory which posits knowledge structures might be dynamically related.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".