Search

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic led to a global surge in videoconferencing use for work/study‐related reasons. Although these platforms heighten exposure to one's image, the implications of videoconferencing use on body image and eating concerns remain scantly examined. This study sought to investigate, in an Australian sample, whether videoconferencing for work/study‐related reasons predicted increases in body dissatisfaction (BD), urge to engage in disordered eating (DE; restrictive eating, exercise, overeating/purging), and negative mood at the state level. Participants (N = 482, 78.8% women, Mage = 20.5 years [SD = 5.3]) completed baseline demographic measures, accompanied by an ecological momentary assessment (EMA) of videoconferencing for work/study‐related reasons, BD, DE urges, and negative mood six times a day for 7 days via a smartphone application. Most participants (n = 429; 89.0%) reported state‐based videoconferencing use during the EMA phase. Consistent with expectations, state‐based videoconferencing use was associated with an increase in state‐level urges to engage in exercise. However, contrary to predictions, state‐based videoconferencing use was linked to a decrease in state‐level BD at the next assessment point and failed to predict negative mood and urges to engage in restrictive eating or overeating/purging at the state level. Given the simplified measure of videoconferencing use, the current research is considered preliminary and future replication and extension, using more nuanced measures, is warranted. Highlights: State videoconferencing use predicted increased urges for exercise, but not negative mood, or urges for binge‐eating/purging or restrictive eatingState videoconferencing use predicted decreased body dissatisfaction (i.e., increased body satisfaction)Encourage future research into the nuances of videoconferencing use and potential consequences of interface design features [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To validate the original and a shortened version of the Detail and Flexibility (DFlex) Questionnaire. Method: Confirmatory factor analyses, internal consistency, and discriminant validity estimates were conducted within individuals with a diagnosis of an eating disorder (ED) (n = 124), an anxiety disorder and/or depression (n = 219), and a community sample (n = 852) (Part 1). Convergent validity of the DFlex through comparisons with the Autism Spectrum Quotient, Wisconsin Card Sorting Task, and Group Embedded Figures Task was undertaken within a combined ED and community sample (N = 68). Test‐retest reliability of the DFlex was also examined across 2 years in a community sample (N = 85) (Part 2). Results: The original factor structure of the DFlex was not supported. Hence, a shortened version, the DFlex‐Revised, was developed. Good discriminant validity was obtained for the DFlex and DFlex‐Revised, however, support for convergent validity was mixed. Finally, the 2‐year test‐retest reliability for the two DFlex versions was found to be low, suggesting potential malleability in construct over this timeframe. Conclusions: Further research is needed to validate the DFlex in clinical and non‐clinical populations using different neurocognitive tests. Test‐retest, using varied time intervals, should also be assessed. Highlights: A revised shortened version of the DFlex (DFlex‐Revised) was developed.Findings support the factor structure of the DFlex‐Revised in eating disorders, anxiety/depression, and community groups.Good internal consistency and discriminant validity were obtained for both DFlex versions.The DFlex and DFlex‐Revised demonstrated some instability over a 2‐year period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study extends the dual pathway model (DPM) of bulimic symptoms by considering the bidirectional effects amongst symptoms of depression, dietary restraint, and bulimia. We also assessed the influence of negative urgency, a personality construct associated with bulimic symptoms, on the DPM. Method: Participants were 244 females (Mage = 23.77 years) from the general community. Variables pertinent to the DPM as well as negative urgency were assessed at baseline, and symptoms of depression, dietary restraint, and bulimia were reassessed at 1‐month follow‐up. Results: Excellent model fit was obtained once modifications were made to the DPM and the extended model that included negative urgency. Cross‐sectional paths replicated the DPM as hypothesized, with the exception that time 1 (T1) body mass index failed to predict T1 body dissatisfaction. Although no bidirectional effects were observed, T1 depression predicted dietary restraint at time 2 (T2). Negative urgency was shown to provide incremental predictive utility of T1 pressure to be thin, T1 body dissatisfaction, and T1 and T2 depression. Conclusion: Findings lend support to the DPM and suggest that depression might be a risk factor for later dietary restraint. The results are also consistent with the notion that negative urgency may be an independent risk factor for symptoms of bulimia. However, short‐term longitudinal effects of these putative risk factors require further evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]