2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2008.10.027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Relationships among loneliness, interpersonal dependency, and disordered eating in young adults

Abstract: This is an author-produced, peer-reviewed version of this article. © 2009, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. The final, definitive version of this document can be found online at the Personality and Individual Differences, doi: 10.1016Differences, doi: 10. /j.paid.2008 This is an author-produced, peer-reviewed version of this article. The final, definitive version of this document can b… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
23
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
1
23
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Specifically, loneliness was found to account for a small, but significant amount of unique variance in drive for thinness, bulimic symptoms, and body dissatisfaction in female college students. Interestingly, although past researchers have often portrayed loneliness as a general risk factor for eating disturbances and disorders (e.g., Levine, 2012;Pritchard & Yalch, 2009), we found some evidence for specificity across the prediction models. That is, after controlling for BIS/BAS motives, loneliness was found to be two times more involved in predicting bulimic symptoms than predicting drive for thinness and body dissatisfaction in females.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 50%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Specifically, loneliness was found to account for a small, but significant amount of unique variance in drive for thinness, bulimic symptoms, and body dissatisfaction in female college students. Interestingly, although past researchers have often portrayed loneliness as a general risk factor for eating disturbances and disorders (e.g., Levine, 2012;Pritchard & Yalch, 2009), we found some evidence for specificity across the prediction models. That is, after controlling for BIS/BAS motives, loneliness was found to be two times more involved in predicting bulimic symptoms than predicting drive for thinness and body dissatisfaction in females.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 50%
“…We focused on three relatively distinct indices of eating disturbances, namely, drive for thinness, bulimic symptoms, and body dissatisfaction, as these are believed to represent core attitudes and behaviors present in anorexia and bulimia (Garner, Olmstead, & Polivy, 1983), and because they have often been examined in studies involving female college students (e.g., Boisvert & Harrell, 2009;Pritchard & Yalch, 2009). By focusing on more than one eating disturbance outcome, we also hoped to evaluate the generalizability of our prediction findings across outcomes.…”
Section: Purpose Of the Present Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…First, as loneliness has mediated interpersonal/emotional dependency and body dissatisfaction [11], it may mediate between emotion dysregulation and BN/BED psychopathology. Alternatively, emotion dysregulation may mediate between loneliness and BN/BED psychopathology.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Clinical descriptions of dependency focus on a helpless self-schema, which causes individuals to exhibit needy, clingy behavior even in situations where autonomous functioning is warranted (Bornstein, 1992; Millon & Davis, 1996). For example, maladaptive dependency is linked with increased risk for depression (Blatt & Zuroff, 1992), eating disorders (Pritchard & Yalch, 2009), and anxiety disorders (Ng & Bornstein, 2005). However, clinicians and researchers increasingly agree that the dependency related motivation to obtain and maintain nurturing and supportive relationships is neither positive nor negative, but may enhance functioning in certain contexts while undermining it in others (Bornstein, 1992; Pincus & Wilson, 2001).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%