The association of perfectionism, health‐focused self‐concept, and erroneous beliefs with orthorexia nervosa symptoms: A moderated mediation model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Orthorexia nervosa (ON) is a putative eating disorder linked to perfectionism among people who eat healthily (or who want to eat healthily). However, little is known about the process by which perfectionism fosters ON symptoms. Like the Transdiagnostic Cognitive-Behavioral Theory of Eating Disorders, we hypothesized that perfectionism among people who eat healthily (or who want to eat healthily) fosters ON symptoms indirectly by cultivating a health-focused self-concept (i.e., placing overriding importance on health for self-definition and self-worth). We also hypothesized that a health-focused self-concept would be associated with ON symptoms among people who have erroneous beliefs about the safety and efficacy of maladaptive healthy eating strategies. METHOD: To test this moderated mediation model, a sample of people following a healthy eating diet plan and/or who believe they are leading a healthy eating lifestyle (N = 456) were recruited from Amazon's Mechanical Turk and completed measures that assessed perfectionism, health-focused self-concept, ON symptoms, and erroneous beliefs about the safety and efficacy of maladaptive healthy eating strategies. They also completed a measure of appearance-focused self-concept. RESULTS: Health-focused and appearance-focused self-concepts were empirically distinct. As expected, perfectionism was indirectly and positively associated with ON symptoms via a health-focused self-concept. Importantly, the indirect association was only observed among participants high, but not low, in erroneous beliefs. DISCUSSION: The findings support the role of perfectionism in ON. The findings also advance knowledge by identifying a health-focused self-concept and erroneous beliefs as potential factors in the etiology and maintenance of ON.
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 | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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".