Does the Interpersonal Model Generalize to Obesity Without Binge Eating?
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 interpersonal model has been validated for binge eating disorder (BED), but it is not yet known if the model applies to individuals who are obese but who do not binge eat. The goal of this study was to compare the validity of the interpersonal model in those with BED versus those with obesity, and normal weight samples. Data from a sample of 93 treatment-seeking women diagnosed with BED, 186 women who were obese without BED, and 100 controls who were normal weight were examined for indirect effects of interpersonal problems on binge eating psychopathology mediated through negative affect. Findings demonstrated the mediating role of negative affect for those with BED and those who were obese without BED. Testing a reverse model suggested that the interpersonal model is specific for BED but that this model may not be specific for those without BED. This is the first study to find support for the interpersonal model in a sample of women with obesity but who do not binge. However, negative affect likely plays a more complex role in determining overeating in those with obesity but who do not binge. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and Eating Disorders Association.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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