Cited by 20Eating Disorders and BehaviorsBody Image and Dysmorphia StudiesNutrition, Health and Food Behavior

A revised examination of the dual pathway model for bulimic symptoms: The importance of social comparisons made on Facebook and sociotropy.

Open access
Puccio, Francis, Kalathas, Fiona, Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Matthew, Krug, Isabel·2016·Computers in Human Behavior

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.018

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Puccio, F., Kalathas, F., Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M., & Krug, I.
Affiliations
The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Puccio, Francis
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-12
Volume
65
Pages
142-150
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2511480926
Cited by
20
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
2.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Body Image and Dysmorphia Studies
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Keywords
bulimia nervosa, dual-pathway model, social comparison, Facebook, sociotropy, body dissatisfaction, thin-ideal internalization, depressive symptoms, dietary restraint, adolescent girls

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review