Bidirectional Associations Between Body Image Concerns and Sense of Competence and Relatedness in Students: Gender and Age Differences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Psychological difficulties can impede the satisfaction of competence and relatedness needs, which are essential for students' well-being and academic achievement. Body image concerns are common psychological difficulties among youth. However, the relationship between body image and these fundamental needs at school remains underexplored. Therefore, the present study examined the longitudinal associations between students' body image concerns and sense of competence and relatedness, and the degree to which teachers' emotional support moderated these bidirectional associations. Gender and age differences were also investigated. METHODS: A total of 2675 students (9-17 years; 41% male/56% female; 74.1% White/25.9% racialized) from 47 schools in Canada completed questionnaires on body image, sense of competence and relatedness at school, and perceived teachers' emotional support at the beginning and at the end of the same academic year. RESULTS: After controlling for potential confounding variables, body image concerns predicted a lower sense of competence over time, but the reverse association only applied for girls and older students. Body image concerns and sense of relatedness were also found to be bidirectionally associated over time with significant gender differences. Girls' body image concerns predicted a lower sense of relatedness, whereas boys' lower sense of relatedness predicted higher body image concerns over time. Teachers' support moderated some of these associations. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that body image concerns can impact students' sense of competence and relatedness, and vice versa, with significant gender differences. Teachers appear to play a protective role, especially for girls' and older students' body image.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".