The Relationship between Alexithymia, Dysmorphic Concern, and Exercise Addiction: The Moderating Effect of Self-Esteem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As with other addictions, exercise addiction can severely impact individuals' lives and have significant psychophysical consequences. Consequently, the study of the mechanisms involved in this psychopathological condition has great clinical and practical relevance. Therefore, the goal of the present study was to explore the risk factors and protective factors for exercise addiction, with a particular focus on the roles of alexithymia, body image concerns, and self-esteem. A sample of 288 regular exercisers (mean age = 28.35 years, SD = 8.26; 72% females, 18% males) completed the Exercise Addiction Inventory, 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale, Body Image Concern Inventory, and Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Data were analyzed by implementing a moderated mediation model. Results showed a significant and positive association between alexithymia and exercise addiction, totally mediated by body image concerns. Furthermore, self-esteem showed a relevant moderating effect, such that at high levels of self-esteem the effect of alexithymia on body image concerns became insignificant. Such data have important implications, highlighting some core variables on which it might be useful to keep a focus in order to elaborate tailored interventions, from both preventive and treatment perspectives.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".