Examining the Bidirectional Association Between Body Esteem and Body Mass Index During Adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Research on body esteem (weight and appearance esteem) and weight suggests that having a positive body esteem may be associated with more stable weight trajectories during adolescence, and adolescents with higher weight report lower levels of body esteem. However, bidirectional relationships between body esteem and weight have not yet been examined. This 3-year longitudinal study examined (1) bidirectional relationships between body esteem and body mass index (BMI) and (2) how BMI and body esteem changed together throughout adolescence. METHODS: Participants (N = 1163 adolescents, at time 1 [T1] baseline; 60.3% female) from a school-based community sample completed surveys approximately annually for 3 years. RESULTS: Latent growth modeling revealed that (a) among boys and girls, appearance and weight esteem scores decreased over time, (b) higher initial BMI scores were associated with slower decreases in appearance esteem over time. However, evidence for bidirectionality was not found, in which baseline appearance and weight esteem did not predict changes in BMI over time and vice versa. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that changes in BMI and body esteem are co-occurring (rather than predictive) throughout adolescence. The decreasing trajectory of body esteem over time suggests the need for prevention efforts to improve body esteem throughout adolescence.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".