Body mass index, peer victimization, and body dissatisfaction across 7 years of childhood and adolescence: Evidence of moderated and mediated pathways
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Numerous studies have reported that children and adolescents who are overweight are more likely to get bullied, yet the literature is replete with methodological limitations. We examined the transactional associations between peer victimization and body mass index (BMI), considering potential mediating (body dissatisfaction) and moderating (biological sex) factors. Participants (n = 631) came from the McMaster Teen Study, where students were assessed annually between Grades 5–11, approximately half were girls (53.9%), and the majority were white (76.4%). Peer victimization (from Grade 5) and body dissatisfaction (from Grade 6) were self‐reported by students, while parents reported their child's height and weight (from Grade 5). Cascade models were built up sequentially using path analysis across 2‐year increments (Grades 5, 7, 9, and 11). The final model had excellent fit to the data (χ2 = 73.961, df = 66, p = 0.234). Grade 5 peer victimization had a direct effect on BMI across a 2‐year period in girls (b = 0.59, SE = 0.21, p = 0.005) and boys (b = 0.82, SE = 0.30, p = 0.006), and an indirect effect on BMI via body dissatisfaction across a 4‐year period (b = 0.074, 95% CI = 0.012–0.152, p = 0.036). At no point did BMI directly increase risk for peer victimization, yet there were indirect effects via body dissatisfaction among girls but not boys. Peer victimization and body dissatisfaction were proximally and longitudinally related at every time point and there was a transactional association in late‐adolescence among girls but not boys. Targeting modifiable factors in the social (peer victimization) and psychological (body dissatisfaction) domains may limit accelerated weight gain and the health risks associated with excess adiposity.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".