Morning Momentary Appearance Dissatisfaction Predicts Daily Increases in Momentary Appearance‐Focused Self‐Concept Among Female University Students: An Experience Sampling Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Theory and research indicate that appearance-focused self-concept-the tendency to base one's self-worth and self-definition heavily on physical appearance-plays a key role in the development and maintenance of disordered eating in daily life. Herein, we examined whether momentary appearance dissatisfaction at the start of the day predicts steeper within-day increases in momentary appearance-focused self-concept. METHOD: = 18.95, SD = 2.22) completed six momentary assessments per day for 14 days, measuring appearance-focused self-concept and appearance dissatisfaction-satisfaction. End-of-day surveys assessed daily dietary restraint. Latent growth curve models were used to examine within-day changes and test appearance dissatisfaction-satisfaction as a moderator. RESULTS: Appearance-focused self-concept increased linearly from 9 a.m. to 3 PM (b = 0.05, z = 3.64, p < 0.001). Greater within-day increases in appearance-focused self-concept were associated with higher daily dietary restraint (b = 2.29, z = 3.22, p = 0.001). Appearance dissatisfaction-satisfaction at 9 a.m. moderated the trajectory (b = -0.03, z = -2.27, p = 0.02): appearance-focused self-concept increased on days when participants felt more appearance-dissatisfied at 9 a.m. (b = 0.08, z = 3.52, p < 0.001) but remained stable on days when they felt more appearance-satisfied at 9 a.m. (b = 0.02, z = 1.20, p = 0.23). DISCUSSION: Findings suggest that morning-appearance dissatisfaction may set in motion increases in appearance-focused self-concept during the day. Findings highlight the importance of targeting appearance dissatisfaction in the morning to prevent the daily buildup of appearance concerns linked to disordered eating.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".