The Meaning of Discontent: A Multi-method Qualitative Investigation of Women's Lived Experiences with Body Dissatisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored adult women’s lived experiences with body dissatisfaction. Using a multi-methods qualitative approach incorporating in-depth semi-structured interviews and arts-based projects, women between the ages of 20-39 engaged in a critical exploration of their body experiences in order to deepen understanding of the psychological construct of body dissatisfaction and its ongoing influence in their lives. Ten women from diverse social and ethnocultural backgrounds took part in the study, completing 1-2 interviews, an in-session drawing exercise, and a creative project. Interview transcripts, drawings, and creative projects were analyzed for themes using an hermeneutic phenomenological approach. Four core categories emerged from the data. The first category contained the women’s understanding of the experience and meaning of body dissatisfaction. The second category captured the external reinforcement of body dissatisfaction and related body beliefs. The third emergent category delineated the impact of body dissatisfaction on daily life, including body-self relationships and interpersonal relationships. The final category captured the difficulties the women encountered as they attempted to overcome their feelings of body dissatisfaction and their negative body beliefs. This research highlighted the complex and multidimensional meaning of body dissatisfaction in adult women’s lives.
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 | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".