The Effects of Self-Compassion and Self-Esteem Writing Interventions on Women’s Valuation of Weight Management Goals, Body Appreciation, and Eating Behaviors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we examined the effects of body-focused daily self-compassion and self-esteem expressive writing activities on women’s valuation of weight management goals, body appreciation, bulimic symptoms, and healthy and unhealthy eating behaviors. One-hundred twenty-six women, recruited from the community and a university participant pool ( Mage = 29.3, SD = 13.6), were randomly allocated to one of the three writing conditions: body-focused self-compassion, body-focused self-esteem, or control. Women reflected on a moment within the past 24 hours that made them feel self-conscious about their bodies, eating, or exercise habits (self-compassion and self-esteem conditions) or on a particular situation or feeling that occurred in the past 24 hours (control condition) for 4–7 days. At post-treatment (24 hours after the intervention), women in the self-compassion group demonstrated decreased bulimic symptoms, while women in the self-esteem and control conditions did not. Furthermore, clinically significant changes in bulimic symptoms were associated with being in the self-compassion condition but not in the self-esteem or control conditions. Results suggest that body-focused writing interventions may be more effective in temporarily reducing eating disorder symptoms in women if they focus on harnessing self-compassion. Additional online materials for this article are available on PWQ ’s website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/03616843211013465
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it