“Feeling fat,” the somatic sensation of being overweight that does not entirely correlate with one's actual weight, is recognized clinically as a maintenance factor in eating disorders. Occurring amidst Western internalized thin ideals and weight stigma, “feeling fat” is wide‐reaching and also reported by those with subclinical and absent eating pathology. However, empirical study of “feeling fat” is limited. Regarding proposed mechanisms, “feeling fat” may (a) reflect the displacement of negative affect onto the body, (b) represent one element of a cognitive distortion related to the imagined consumption of fattening food, and/or (c) be a function of impaired interoceptive awareness. However, the relative and/or joint contributions of these mechanisms to “feeling fat” are unclear. Regarding measurement, retrospective assessment with single items has been the norm. Innovative measures of “feeling fat” will expand our understanding of this construct. Ecological momentary assessment can clarify the transitory nature of this experience, and physiological measures can allow for assessment of somatic elements of “feeling fat. Multi‐method and implicit measurement strategies of ‘feeling fat’” may clarify the mechanisms underlying this experience. Further research with improved measurement techniques may also benefit eating disorder treatment by highlighting new treatment foci (e.g., cognitive distortions, interoceptive awareness).

No abstract

Background:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted the lives of people globally, and the significant mental health consequences of this pandemic are beginning to be documented. In addition to sociodemographic and COVID-19 specific factors, psychological risk and protective mechanisms likely influence individual differences in mental health symptoms in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined associations between a broad set of risk and protective factors with symptoms of depression, anxiety, alcohol problems, and eating pathology, and investigated interactions between objective stress due to COVID-19 and risk/protective variables in predicting psychopathology. Methods: Participants were 877 adults (73.7% female) recruited via internet sources from around the globe, but primarily residing in North America (87.4%). Results: Structural equation modelling revealed that certain risk and protective factors (e.g., loneliness, latent protective factor, mindfulness) were broadly related to psychopathology, whereas others showed unique relations with specific forms of psychopathology (e.g., greater repetitive thinking and anxiety; low meaning and purpose and depression). COVID-19 objective stress interacted with risk factors, but not protective factors, to predict greater anxiety symptoms, but not other forms of psychopathology.Limitations: This is a cross-sectional study of non-randomly recruited participants who reported high levels of income and education. Rates of problematic alcohol use were low. Conclusions: Findings contribute to our understanding of psychological mechanisms underlying individual differences in psychopathology in the context of a global stressor. Strategies that reduce loneliness and increase mindfulness will likely impact the greatest number of mental health symptoms.

No abstract

No abstract

‘Feeling fat,’ the somatic experience of being overweight not entirely explained by objective weight, may occur due to the projection of negative affect onto the body. Individuals may manage ‘feeling fat’ via eating pathology (e.g., binge eating or dietary restriction) rather than address the source of negative affect. Thus, ‘feeling fat’ may occur in the absence of adaptive emotion regulation strategies. The COVID-19 pandemic has increased negative affect widely and may potentially contribute to the experience of ‘feeling fat’ and eating pathology among individuals with emotion dysregulation. This study examined whether emotion dysregulation moderates ‘feeling fat's’ role as a mechanism underlying the relationship between COVID-19-related distress and eating pathology. This uniqueness of this model to eating pathology was investigated by comparing effects for binge eating and dietary restriction versus anxiety, depression, and problematic alcohol use. Structural equation modelling was used to analyze questionnaire data from 877 participants (77.3% women). ‘Feeling fat’ explained significant variance in the relationship between COVID-19-related distress and both binge eating and restriction. Emotion dysregulation modulated the strength of these relationships. However, ‘feeling fat's role in the relationship between pandemic-related distress and negative psychological outcomes was not unique to eating pathology and did not vary based upon emotion dysregulation. Individuals with elevated emotion dysregulation are more likely to report eating pathology, but not other outcomes, in the context of ‘feeling fat’. In contrast, ‘feeling fat’ underlies the relationship between COVID-19-distress and transdiagnostic psychological outcomes, meaning ‘feeling fat’ should be considered in risk for psychopathology beyond eating disorders.

Objectives This study explored how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has affected individuals with mental health conditions. Methods Participants were 477 adults (82% female) who reported a past‐year mental health condition. They completed an online survey that included an open‐ended question. Mixed methods analysis was conducted. Results While all mental health conditions were moderately impacted by the COVID‐19 pandemic, self‐reported impact on anxiety disorder and obsessive‐compulsive disorder symptoms was greater than for all other mental health symptoms. Thematic analysis revealed five themes: (1) the contribution of the pandemic to worsening mental health; (2) life interruptions due to the pandemic; (3) increased loneliness/isolation; (4) upsides of the pandemic; and (5) normalization of the anxieties previously experienced by those with mental health conditions. Conclusion Individuals with pre‐existing mental health conditions reported a worsening of symptoms during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Governments and organizations must focus on supporting and increasing access to treatment for this population.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted the lives of people globally, and the significant mental health consequences of this pandemic are beginning to be documented. In addition to sociodemographic and COVID-19 specific factors, psychological risk and protective mechanisms likely influence individual differences in mental health symptoms in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined associations between a broad set of risk and protective factors with symptoms of depression, anxiety, alcohol problems, and eating pathology, and investigated interactions between objective stress due to COVID-19 and risk/protective variables in predicting psychopathology. Methods: Participants were 877 adults (73.7% female) recruited via internet sources from around the globe, but primarily residing in North America (87.4%). Results: Structural equation modelling revealed that certain risk and protective factors (e.g., loneliness, latent protective factor, mindfulness) were broadly related to psychopathology, whereas others showed unique relations with specific forms of psychopathology (e.g., greater repetitive thinking and anxiety; low meaning and purpose and depression). COVID-19 objective stress interacted with risk factors, but not protective factors, to predict greater anxiety symptoms, but not other forms of psychopathology. Limitations: This is a cross-sectional study of non-randomly recruited participants who reported high levels of income and education. Rates of problematic alcohol use were low. Conclusions: Findings contribute to our understanding of psychological mechanisms underlying individual differences in psychopathology in the context of a global stressor. Strategies that reduce loneliness and increase mindfulness will likely impact the greatest number of mental health symptoms.