Dietary restraint : the role of causal attributions / Darlene Flood.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have indicated that restrained and unrestrained eaters \nexhibit dififerent eating patterns in response to preloading or no preloading. After \na preload, restrained eaters tend to exhibit counterregulatory behaviour, where \nthey consume more and unrestrained eaters tend to exhibit normal regulatory \nbehaviour, where they consume less. The present study was designed to examine \nvsdiether these patterns are due to different attributional styles exhibited by \nrestrained and unrestrained eaters. In Phase 1, undergraduates enrolled in \nIntroductory Psychology were administered the Restraint Scale, the Beck \nDepression Inventory, and the Eating Attributional Style Questionnaire. It was \nhypothesized that restrained eaters would attribute Mure to maintain dietary \nrestraint in hypothetical situations to internal, stable, and global causes which are \nassociated with the abstinence violation effect (AVE). Contrary to expectations. \nMure to maintain restraint was attributed to external and global causes. For \nPhase 2, 100 female subjects were selected fi*om the above pool of subjects based \non their scores on the questionnaires. Using a matching procedure, subjects were \nrandomly assigned to one oftwo conditions: preload or no preload. In both \nconditions, subjects' cookie consunq)tion was measured in a taste test. The results, \nusing a median split analysis, indicated that an external orientation to food \nconsunq)tion was a better predictor ofthe preloading effect than the dimension of \nrestraint.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".