Self‐compassion promotes social safeness in patients with eating disorders: A 12‐week longitudinal study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Social safeness, the affective experience of being comforted and soothed by others, promotes positive mental health and when compromised, contributes to mental illness. Although there is some knowledge about the factors that give rise to social safeness, research has focused on developmental predictors such as parental warmth, leaving it unclear how adults who lacked these early experiences can feel socially safe. Self-compassion is a skill that can be cultivated; it involves directing warmth inward and may thereby facilitate emotional states akin to social safeness. We tested this theory in a population known for low social safeness, adults with eating disorders, by examining whether increases in self-compassion facilitated subsequent increases in social safeness during a cognitive-behavioural group-based treatment. DESIGN: A longitudinal design was used. METHODS: Eighty-six patients with eating disorders completed the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire, Self-Compassion Scale, and Social Safeness and Pleasure Scale approximately every three weeks over a 12-week intensive eating disorder treatment program. RESULTS: = .18, p < .05). Additionally, individuals with higher average levels of self-compassion over the course of treatment experienced higher social safeness (B = .53, p < .01). CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that the cultivation of self-compassion may facilitate the feelings of social safeness that individuals with eating disorders generally lack. Results therefore highlight the role that the development of self-compassion can play in fostering social safeness in people with psychological disorders.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".