Propelling pride to promote healthy food choices among entity and incremental theorists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Past research suggests that people's beliefs about the malleability of their body weight influence their motivation to engage in healthful behaviors: people who perceive their body weight as fixed (entity theorists) engage less in healthful behaviors than people who perceive their body weight as changeable (incremental theorists). Accordingly, current health interventions frequently aim at shifting entity theorists' beliefs about the malleability of their body weight. Instead of trying to change these beliefs, we test whether the elicitation of pride from past achievements can serve as an intervention to promote healthful behaviors among entity theorists. In addition, we contrast the effect of pride recall among entity theorists with the effect among incremental theorists. Specifically, we find that entity theorists chose healthier behaviors upon the recall of pride related and unrelated to the health domain - the source of pride does not seem to matter. For incremental theorists, however, the source of pride does matter. While health-related pride led them to persist in making healthy food choices, health-unrelated pride instilled reward-seeking behavior among incremental theorists. Prompting health-related pride might be a viable motivational tool to promote healthy food choices, as it is beneficial for entity theorists without thwarting the motivation of incremental theorists.
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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".