Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 386

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Dissonance and healthy weight eating disorder prevention programs: A randomized efficacy trial.

Open access
Stice, Eric, Shaw, Heather, Burton, Emily, Wade, Emily·2006·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

In this trial, adolescent girls with body dissatisfaction (N = 481, M age = 17 years) were randomized to an eating disorder prevention program involving dissonance-inducing activities that reduce thin-ideal internalization, a prevention program promoting healthy weight management, an expressive writing control condition, or an assessment-only control condition. Dissonance participants showed significantly greater reductions in eating disorder risk factors and bulimic symptoms than healthy weight, expressive writing, and assessment-only participants, and healthy weight participants showed significantly greater reductions in risk factors and symptoms than expressive writing and assessment-only participants from pretest to posttest. Although these effects faded over 6-month and 12-month follow-ups, dissonance and healthy weight participants showed significantly lower binge eating and obesity onset and reduced service utilization through 12-month follow-up, suggesting that both interventions have public health potential.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-006x.74.2.263

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 386

Metadata

Authors
Stice, E., Shaw, H., Burton, E., & Wade, E.
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2006
Volume
74
Issue
2
Pages
263-275
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W2074904891
Cited by
386
References
10
FWCI
19.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.