MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Asian female body image research in the United States and Canada, Part I

2024· book-chapter· en· W4404422691 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hsiu‐Lan Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenueElsevier eBooks · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter reviews Asian female body image research in the United States and Canada from a pan-ethnic perspective. A significant line of this research has focused on group comparisons. A number of studies found Asian/Asian American females generally report more dissatisfaction with their bodies or certain body parts than females of other racial/ethnic backgrounds, but the empirical literature is not unequivocal. The commonly theorized predictors of body image explain Asian/Asian American female body image and other racial groups in a comparable way, but racial/ethnic and cultural factors complement and enrich existing theoretical models in a significant way in explaining the development of body image concerns among Asian/Asian American women. Qualitative studies also reveal complex intersections of societal, sociocultural, interpersonal, and individual/cognitive-behavioral factors and processes that shape body image development among Asian/Asian American women and highlight the importance of attending to women's bicultural contexts. Future directions for research and practice are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.013
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElsevier eBooksSame topicObesity and Health PracticesFrench-language works237,207