An introduction to the Body-Related Self-Conscious Emotions (BSE) Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most body image research has adopted a narrow view by focusing on the general negative emotion of anxiety. Research and health practice would benefit by targeting specific body-related emotional experiences of shame, guilt, and pride. The purpose of the current study was to examine reliability (internal consistency, temporal stability) and validity (factorial, convergent) of the BSE scale. Men (n=77) and women (n=223; Mage=22.4 ± 6.1 yrs; 72% Caucasian; MBMI = 23.2 ± 4.1 kg/m2) completed the BSE scale and various body image, personality, and emotion scales. A random sample (n=37; 38% male) completed the BSE scale two weeks later. The BSE scale scores demonstrated Cronbach's alpha coefficients of .91-.95 and stability over time (ICC =.75 - .88, p < .001) for shame, guilt, and authentic and hubristic pride. CFA supported the 4-factor structure for the BSE scale (c2(293)=623.46, p < .001, Robust CFI=.93, RMSEA=.06 (90% CI=.06-.07), SRMR=.05). Shame and guilt were related to depressive symptoms (DS; r=.52, .41), negative affect (NA; r=.54, .43), self-esteem (SE; r=-.41, -.33), positive affect (PA; r=-.38, -.31), and social physique anxiety (SPA; r=.73, .58). Authentic pride was linked to SE (r=.14), PA (r=.46), conscientiousness (r=.13) , agreeableness (r=.18), SPA (r=-.36), DS (r=-.30), and NA (r=-.22). Hubristic pride was associated with SE (r=.15), PA (r=.38), SPA (r=-.41), DS (r=-.23), and NA (r=-.17). The development and validation of the BSE scale may help advance body image and self-conscious emotion research by providing a foundation to examine the unique antecedents and outcomes of these specific emotional experiences.Acknowledgments: Castonguay is supported by a SSHRC Doctoral Fellowship. Dr. Sabiston is a FRSQ Junior 1 Scholar.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".