Actions speak louder than coaches: Eating disorder behaviour among student-athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the current study was to examine the prevalence of eating disorder behaviours among student-athletes at a small, non-NCAA (Canadian) university, while evaluating the influence of gender, type of sport, and perceived social support. Two hundred participants (130 female, 70 male) completed an online survey that assessed participants eating disorder behaviours (EAT-26), behaviours consistent with the Adonis Complex (ACQ) and perceived social support (modified MPSS). The results revealed significant differences in eating disorder behaviour between female and male athletes, with females scoring significantly higher; yet no differences were found between how female and male athletes scored on the Adonis Complex Questionnaire. Significant differences were found between lean-sport and non-lean sport athletes, with lean sport athletes exhibiting more eating disorder behaviours. Furthermore, non-lean sport male athletes were found to score significantly higher than lean-sport male athletes for the Adonis Complex. Perceived social support was found to be negatively correlated to eating disorder behaviours and when considering gender and type of sport, accounted for unique variance in eating disorder behaviour. These results suggest that student-athletes are susceptible to negative mental health outcomes, even within the context of a smaller (and non-NCAA) university context, and eating behaviours vary among athlete and sport type. The results highlight the importance of continued research in this area and of having support systems in place for student-athletes and increasing awareness of athletic staff and coaches as to the seriousness and prevalence of eating disorder behaviours.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".