Social–emotional functioning in young people with symptoms of eating disorders: A gender inclusive analogue study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Contemporary models of eating disorders (EDs) suggest that EDs are maintained by social-emotional difficulties. However, supporting evidence is derived largely from female, clinic-based samples. This study, which refrained from gender specific inclusion criteria, aimed to improve understanding of social-emotional functioning in a large community-based analogue sample of young adults aged 16-26. METHODS: Five hundred and forty-four participants (85.1% female; mean age 21, SD = 4.3) completed the Eating Attitudes Test, Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation, Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale, Social Phobia Inventory, Revised Social Anhedonia Scale, Toronto Alexithymia Scale, and the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Task. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-four participants scored over the EAT-26 clinical cutoff, and a two-way multivariate analysis of covariance found a medium-sized, statistically significant main effect of group on social-emotional functioning (F(5, 530) = 6.204, p ≤ .001, Wilks' Λ = 0.945, d = 0.48.), suggesting that individuals with significant ED symptoms found it more challenging to notice, label, and regulate emotions in themselves and recognize emotions in others. Gender did not significantly impact social-emotional functioning (F(10, 1,060) = 0.556, p = .850, Wilks' Λ = 0.990), and there was no significant group by gender interaction (F(10, 1,060) = 0.688, p = .737, Wilks' Λ = 0.987). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the social-emotional difficulties, particularly with emotion recognition and regulation, present in clinical samples are also evident in young people of all genders with significant disordered eating. Future work could aim to recruit an even more gender-diverse community sample to further elucidate social-emotional functioning in individuals in the community with significant disordered eating.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".