The relationship of exercise addiction with alexithymia and orthorexia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Based on the hypothesis that exercise addiction must be in accordance with general rules of addiction, it may be associated with healthy eating obsession as orthorexia and emotion blindness as alexithymia. This study aimed to determine the relationship between exercise addiction level and alexithymia and orthorexia. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted on individuals who regularly exercise for more than 150 minutes a week. The descriptive characteristics of the participants were recorded, and the 'Exercise Addiction Scale, Teruel Orthorexia Scale, and Toronto Alexithymia Scale' were applied. According to the Exercise Addiction Scale, the athletes (n=95) were divided into two groups addicted (≥52) and risky (<51). Toronto Alexithymia Scale was used to categorize individuals with 51 point cut of values 'non-alexithymic' and 'alexithymic'. Results: Athletes were found to be 22.1% (n=21) risky, 77.9% (n=74) addicted, and 31.6% (n=30) alexithymic. There was a significant difference between the 'risky' and 'addicted' groups in all sub-dimension scores of the Exercise Addiction Scale (p=0.001). There was a positive relationship between exercise addiction, exercise duration, orthorexia nervosa, and alexithymia at different levels from weak to high (p˂0.05). Conclusion: Higher exercise addiction is a risk factor for alexithymia and orthorexia nervosa.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".