Personal accounts of compulsive exercise and bulimia nervosa: an exploration of psychosocial influences through creative nonfiction storytelling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Compulsive exercise is a common component of eating disorders, characterised by an obsessive need to exercise, often following rigid rules, and using exercise as a maladaptive coping mechanism. However, compulsive exercise is often not well addressed or treated, mainly due to a lack of understanding of how compulsive exercise is developed, experienced, and resolved. Most research, to date, has explored compulsive exercise among individuals with anorexia nervosa and has not considered the social and cultural factors that influence compulsive exercise. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to explore the complex interplay of personal and sociocultural factors that influenced the lived experiences of four individuals with bulimia nervosa and compulsive exercise. A series of four narrative interviews were conducted with each of the participants to allow for an in-depth exploration of lifelong experiences, attitudes, and behaviours around eating, exercise, and the body. The analysis involved two phases: a thematic narrative analysis and creative non-fiction. Two creative non-fiction stories were created that depict the tales of Amber and Carley. Both stories are first-person accounts of their personal experiences developing, living with, and (attempting) recovery from compulsive exercise. Woven through the two stories are the personal, situational, and sociocultural influences that shaped their experiences with exercise, eating, and their body. The two stories recount both different and shared experiences, influences, and trajectories with compulsive exercise and bulimia nervosa, presented through emotional and relatable narratives to appeal to a broad audience of readers.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".