Associations among negative weight‐related experiences, weight bias internalization, and body‐related self‐conscious emotions in adolescents: A daily diary study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The present study examined the between- and within-person associations among negative weight-related experiences, weight bias internalization, and body shame, embarrassment, and pride in adolescents. METHODS: = 15.54, 59.10% girls, 40.86% white) who completed a 5-day daily diary study in 2021. Multilevel models were estimated to examine the between- and within-person associations, as well as the cross-level interactions. RESULTS: Fifty-nine negative weight-related experiences were reported from 22 participants (23.66%) over the 5-day study period. Adolescents with higher average negative weight-related experiences (OR = 19.60, 95% CI = 1.90-202.67) and weight bias internalization (OR = 3.66, CI = 2.07-6.46) had greater odds of reporting shame. Similarly, higher average negative weight-related experiences (OR = 16.29, CI = 3.65-72.75) and weight bias internalization (OR = 2.08, CI = 1.53-2.82) was associated with greater odds of embarrassment. No within-person effects were noted, such that reporting more negative weight-related experiences or weight bias internalization than one's own average was not related to body emotions. CONCLUSIONS: This distinction underscores that the persistent, rather than episodic, aspects of negative weight-related experiences and weight bias internalization are most impactful on adolescents' body image. These findings have implications for recruitment and screening for individual-level interventions for internalized weight bias and body image, and highlight the need for system-level policies and changes that prohibit negative weight-related experiences and messages to reduce likelihood of internalizing weight bias among adolescents.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".