Orthorexia Nervosa as a Disorder of Less Intuition and Emotion Dysregulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emotion regulation difficulties are a significant concern in the realm of eating disorders, serving as either contributing factors or ongoing challenges. While extensive research has explored these issues within prominent eating disorders like anorexia (AN) and bulimia nervosa (BN), there is a noticeable gap when it comes to understanding emotion regulation difficulties (ERD) and intuitive eating (IE) characteristics in the context of orthorexia nervosa (ON). This study aims to bridge this knowledge gap by introducing a quantitative approach to investigate ERD and IE in a Turkish population affected by ON, involving 159 participants. The study's primary findings reveal that ON represents a non-adaptive eating behavior inherently marked by ERD. Notably, a significant gender difference was observed, indicating that men exhibit a higher likelihood of displaying orthorexic tendencies compared to women . Prior research has highlighted the importance of ERD and the absence of IE in the context of AN and BN. This study extends these findings to assert that these emotional factors also constitute critical criteria in the understanding and treatment of ON. Thus, clinicians should be attentive to the emotional aspects when addressing individuals affected by 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".