Adverse childhood experiences and profiles of healthy orthorexia versus orthorexia nervosa: towards an explanatory model of orthorexia as a multidimensional eating style
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Orthorexia is a complex phenomenon comprising distinct dimensions, including orthorexia nervosa (ON) and healthy orthorexia (HO). However, little is known about the factors influencing these dimensions, their disparities, and the psychological factors underlying orthorexia behaviours. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to explore ON versus HO dimensions and the predictive role of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) in a nationally representative sample of Polish individuals. In addition, we aim to investigate the mediating roles of alexithymia, embodiment, and experiential avoidance levels in this association. METHODS: A representative sample of Polish adults (n = 3557) participated in this study. Dimensions of orthorexia (HO, ON) were assessed using the Teruel Orthorexia Scale, while ACEs were evaluated using the Adverse Childhood Experiences Questionnaire. Levels of alexithymia were measured using the Toronto Alexithymia Scale, experiential avoidance through the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire, and embodiment intensity via the Experience of Embodiment Scale. RESULTS: Cluster analysis identified two distinctive orthorexia profiles in the whole sample, i.e., HO (n = 469) and ON (n = 1217), alongside three intermediate HO/ON profiles (n = 1871). The number of ACEs predicted ON tendencies as opposed to HO behaviours in participants. The mediating role of alexithymia, experiential avoidance, and embodiment in the association between ACEs and ON was also observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that orthorexia is a multidimensional eating style shaped by socio-cultural factors. Adverse childhood experiences may be related to ON behaviours by mediating psychological factors such as experiential avoidance, alexithymia, and embodiment. Effective education and collaborative support are necessary for addressing ON tendencies.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".