ADHD symptoms and intuitive eating: The importance of interoceptive awareness and Meaning Mindset.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intuitive Eating (IE) is an approach often used for eating disorder recovery, and individuals with ADHD are at high risk for eating disorders. Individuals with Attention- Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) may also have impaired interoceptive awareness (IA), and interoceptive awareness may be associated with intuitive eating. It is also possible for meaning-making through a meaning mindset to be associated with interoceptive awareness, which could in turn facilitate intuitive eating. This study examined the relationships among ADHD symptoms, IA, IE, and MM. In particular, the indirect effects of IA and MM as mediators between ADHD symptoms and IE were investigated. Seventy-six adults between the ages of 18 and 63 years (mean age: 32.78 years) with varying levels of ADHD symptoms (37 participants with diagnosed ADHD) completed online questionnaires that included the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale, Intuitive Eating Scale-2, Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness, and Adult Identity and Meaning Scale. Findings showed that higher
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".