MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141780641 · doi:10.1177/0959353507088593

Young Women's Experiences of Social Physique Anxiety

2008· article· en· W2141780641 on OpenAlexaff
Tara-Leigh McHugh, Kent C. Kowalski, Diane E. Mack, Peter R.E. Crocker, Sarah Elizabeth Junkin, Lisa Lejbak, Stephanie Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueFeminism & Psychology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBrock UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstruct (python library)AnxietyPsychologyPerspective (graphical)Social anxietyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well documented that young women's social physique anxiety is associated with a number of health-compromising behaviors. The bulk of this research has used the Social Physique Anxiety Scale (SPAS); however, the use of questionnaires in the body domain has been critiqued because of the assumption that women's experiences are singular and static. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to try to better understand young women's experiences of social physique anxiety. Feminist theory was used as a guiding perspective for this case study. Four young women participated (all 15 years old) and multiple methods (i.e. focus group, interviews, abstract photography task) were employed. The four themes developed were: (1) web of emotion; (2) uncertainty; (3) beyond physique; and (4) resignation. The stories of the young women suggest that their experiences are not easily reduced to this singular construct, and that, as a construct, social physique anxiety is limited in helping us to understand women's diverse experiences.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations20
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFeminism & PsychologySame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207