Parental teasing and body dissatisfaction in White and South Asian females: An exploratory cross-sectional analysis using moderated mediation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parental weight-related teasing can be associated with body dissatisfaction among children and adolescents. Though this relationship is frequently observed among White females, limited research has been conducted with other ethnic groups. Previous research has demonstrated a strong link between familial factors and psychosocial functioning in South Asian females. Therefore, it may be the case that similar associations between parental weight teasing and body dissatisfaction can be found in this population. A sample of 352 young adult females, comprising 58.7% White and 42.3% South Asian, all Canadian residents, participated in this exploratory, cross-sectional study. They completed the Perception of Teasing Scale, the Body Shape Questionnaire, the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, and the Beck Depression Inventory. South Asian participants reported higher rates of parental weight-related teasing compared to White participants. For both groups, the association between parental weight teasing and body dissatisfaction showed an indirect path through depressive symptoms, with higher teasing associated with greater depressive symptoms and concurrent body dissatisfaction. The association between teasing and depressive symptoms was moderated by self-esteem, showing a stronger relationship for those with high self-esteem (White) or moderate to high self-esteem (South Asian). Additionally, self-esteem was directly associated with body dissatisfaction among White participants but not in South Asian participants. These exploratory findings provide preliminary evidence of a link between parental teasing and body dissatisfaction in South Asian females, emphasizing the need to consider familial and cultural factors in body dissatisfaction prevention efforts. The importance of ethnic-specific considerations for body dissatisfaction interventions are highlighted, while recognizing that additional longitudinal research is needed to further elucidate this relationship.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".