Perfectionism, disordered eating and well-being in aesthetic sports: The mediating role of passion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aesthetic athletes face higher risks of disordered eating, and perfectionism is one of the determinants involved. While research suggests that perfectionism in sport may play a role in physical and psychological well-being, its influence remains to be confirmed. As such, further examination of the influence of perfectionism on health is warranted as it could lead to better interventions. This preregistered research sought to shed new light on these relationships by investigating the mediating role of passion in the perfectionism-disordered eating relationship as well as physical and psychological well-being in aesthetic sports. In Study 1, 229 American recreational and competitive athletes practicing either gymnastics (n = 150) or artistic swimming (n = 79) were recruited on MTurk to complete an online questionnaire. The same recruitment procedure was used for Study 2, with 107 American gymnasts (n = 69) and artistic swimmers (n = 38) completing the questionnaire at two timepoints, one year apart. Results from path analyses showed that socially prescribed perfectionism was associated with obsessive passion, which in turn was associated with disordered eating. Self-oriented perfectionism was associated with both obsessive and harmonious passion, the latter being more adaptative as it was associated with physical and psychological well-being. Thus, the way one engages in aesthetic sports matters, as engaging with obsessive passion may take a toll on one's health and lead to disordered eating. Conversely, fostering harmonious engagement seems to temper the negative associations between perfectionism and health outcomes and promote positive relationships with athlete's well-being, but requires further study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".