↓ Skip to main content

Effect of a Dissonance-Based Prevention Program on Risk for Eating Disorder Onset in the Context of Eating Disorder Risk Factors

Overview of attention for article published in Prevention Science, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
Title
Effect of a Dissonance-Based Prevention Program on Risk for Eating Disorder Onset in the Context of Eating Disorder Risk Factors
Published in
Prevention Science, October 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11121-011-0251-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric Stice, Paul Rohde, Jeff Gau, Heather Shaw

Abstract

Test (a) whether a dissonance-based eating disorder prevention program that reduces thin-ideal internalization mitigates the effects of risk factors for eating disorder onset and (b) whether the risk factors moderate the effects of this intervention on risk for eating disorder onset, to place the effects of this intervention within the context of established risk factors. Female adolescents (N=481) with body image concerns were randomized to the dissonance-based program, healthy weight control program, expressive writing control condition, or assessment-only control condition. Denial of costs of pursuing the thin-ideal was the most potent risk factor for eating disorder onset during the 3-year follow-up (OR=5.0). The dissonance program mitigated the effect of this risk factor. For participants who did not deny costs of pursuing the thin-ideal, emotional eating and externalizing symptoms increased risk for eating disorder onset. Negative affect attenuated the effects of each of the active interventions in this trial. Results imply that this brief prevention program offsets the risk conveyed by the most potent risk factor for eating disorder onset in this sample, implicate three vulnerability pathways to eating pathology involving thin-ideal pursuit, emotional eating, and externalizing symptoms, and suggest that negative affect mitigates the effects of eating disorder prevention programs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 94 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 22%
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 10%
Other 7 7%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 19 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 37 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 23 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 November 2014.
All research outputs
#13,858,486
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from Prevention Science
#671
of 1,023 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,778
of 133,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Prevention Science
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,023 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 133,853 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.