Between- and within-person effects of stress on emotional eating in women: a longitudinal study over 49 days
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Stress is associated with binge eating and emotional eating (EE) cross-sectionally. However, few studies have examined stress longitudinally, limiting understanding of how within-person fluctuations in stress influence EE over time and whether stress is a risk factor or consequence of EE. Additionally, little is known regarding how the biological stress response relates to EE. Methods We used an intensive, longitudinal design to examine between-person and within-person effects of major life stress, daily stress, and cortisol on EE in a population-based sample of women ( N = 477; ages 15–30; M = 21.8; s.d. = 3.0) from the Michigan State University Twin Registry. Participants reported past year major life stress, then provided daily ratings of EE and stress for 49 consecutive days. Hair cortisol concentration (HCC) was collected as a longitudinal biological stress measure. Results Women reported greater EE when they experienced greater mean stress across days (between-person effects) or greater stress relative to their own average on a given day (within-person effects). Daily stress was more strongly associated with EE than major life stress. However, the impact of daily stress on EE was amplified in women with greater past year major life stress. Finally, participants with lower HCC had increased EE. Conclusions Findings confirm longitudinal associations between stress and EE in women, and highlight the importance of within-person shifts in stress in EE risk. Results also highlight HCC as a novel biological stress measure that is significantly associated with EE and may overcome limitations of prior physiological stress response indicators.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".