The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Thinking Fat: Self‐Schemas for Body Weight and the Processing of Weight Relevant Information1
Abstract
Self‐schemas pertaining to body weight were investigated for their effects on processing weight‐relevant information. Females who had body weight schemas (Schematics) were compared for their cognitive performance on a variety of tasks with females who did not have such schemas (Aschematics). The function and content of the body weight schema was explored by using stimuli that varied in their conceptual relevance to the schema, including verbal descriptors, body silhouettes, and pictures of food. Both Schematics and Aschematics exhibited a sharp differentiation in their processing of “fat” and “thin” trait adjectives, confirming the hypothesis that all individuals will generate at least a simple structure of thoughts and feelings about their bodies. However, only those individuals with highly developed body weight self‐schemas (Schematics) showed a clear and consistent discrimination in their responses across stimulus domains. It is hypothesized that a body weight self‐schema has both universalistic and particularistic aspects. All individuals have some conception of their body image (universalistic aspect), but there is considerable variation in the way they will process stimuli with reference to body weight. Only those with a particularistic schema will show consistent discriminations in their responses in the body weight domain and will use relevance to one's body weight as a selective mechanism in processing a variety of stimuli.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Markus, H., Crane, M., Bernstein, S., & Siladi, M. (1982) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.38 · Cited by 555
Self-citation
Cited by
Exacting beauty: Theory, assessment, and treatment of body image disturbance.
Thompson, J. K., Heinberg, L. J., Altabe, M., & Tantleff-Dunn, S. (1999) · doi:10.1037/10312-000 · Cited by 3,100
Toward a self‐evaluation maintenance model of social behavior
Tesser, A. (1988) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60227-0 · Cited by 1,878
Psychological correlates of obesity: Moving to the next research generation.
Friedman, M. A., & Brownell, K. D. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.3 · Cited by 863
Body image in children and adolescents: where do we go from here?
Smolak, L. (2004) · Body Image · doi:10.1016/s1740-1445(03)00008-1 · Cited by 566
The investigation of schematic content and processing in eating disorders
Vitousek, K. B., & Hollon, S. D. (1990) · Cognitive Therapy and Research · doi:10.1007/bf01176209 · Cited by 507
Metadata
- Authors
- Markus, H., Hamill, R., & Sentis, K. P.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Social Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1987-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 50-71
- ISSN
- 0021-9029 (ISSN-L)
- 1559-1816
- OpenAlex
- W2074278953
- Cited by
- 204
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Thinking Fat: Self‐Schemas for Body Weight and the Processing of Weight Relevant Information1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1987.tb00292.x
- The paper
- Markus, H., Hamill, R., & Sentis, K. P. (1987). Thinking Fat: Self‐Schemas for Body Weight and the Processing of Weight Relevant Information1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1987.tb00292.x
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.