Perceptions of family environment, body image and self-esteem of eating disordered and non-eating disordered women

This study explored the perceptions of family environment, body image and self esteem of women who suffer from anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and depression. Using a nonequivalent control group design, one hundred and fifty women with anorexia nervosa (n = 50), bulimia nervosa (n = 50), and depression (n = 50) were given the Family Environment Scale (FES) and the Eating Disorders Inventory-2 (EDI-2). The objectives of this study were to: (1) study how women with anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa perceive their family environment as measured by the FES; (2) compare and contrast perceptions of family environment of women with anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa with the control group; (3) compare and contrast perceived levels of self esteem and body image as measured by the EDI-2 of women with anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa with the control group; and (4) examine the perceived family environments of eating disordered and non-eating disordered women with regard to body image and self esteem. Results suggested, women who suffered from anorexia nervosa or bulimia nervosa scored significantly lower (p $<$.021) on the Expressiveness, Intellectual-Cultural Orientation, and Active-Recreational subscales of the FES. The results also indicated that women who suffered from bulimia nervosa scored significantly higher (p $<$.015) than women who suffered from anorexia nervosa on the Conflict and Independence subscales of the FES. The results of studying these three populations reflected that women who suffered from anorexia nervosa scored significantly different (p $<$.000) than women who suffered from bulimia nervosa on many of the subscales of the EDI-2. The findings of the study confirmed that women who suffered from anorexia nervosa or bulimia nervosa scored significantly different (p $<$.000) on the subscales of the EDI-2 compared to women who suffered from depression. It was also confirmed that a relationship does exist between perceptions of body image and self esteem and perceptions of family environment amongst women with anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa as compared to depressed women. The findings of the study indicated that women who suffered from anorexia nervosa tended to: be less expressive and independent; handle conflict less openly; have a greater drive for thinness; have greater body dissatisfaction; be more perfectionistic; and struggle more intensely with fears around maturity and social insecurity than did women who suffered from bulimia nervosa or depression. In addition, the findings of the study also suggested that women who suffered from bulimia nervosa tended to: be raised in homes where openly expressed anger is permitted amongst family members; have a lesser drive for thinness; have less body dissatisfaction; be less perfectionistic; and not struggle as intensely with fears around maturity and social insecurity as do women who suffered from anorexia nervosa, but more than women who suffer from depression. Treatment implications that may assist community college professors and counselors in meeting the special needs of this special group of women were also discussed. (Abstract shortened by UMI.) ^

Social-cognitive antecedents of ambidextrous orientation in family-owned startups: The role of family ties, achievement motivation, and internal locus of control

Regulatory Focus Theory predicts that the motivation to self-regulate goal-directed thought and behavior depends on two distinct regulation strategies: a promotion focus based on attaining gains and a prevention focus based on avoiding losses. This study took a social-cognitive approach predicting that regulatory focus has an impact on how family startups (several family related founders) explore "new ideas", exploit "old certainties" and achieve the balance of both (ambidexterity), compared to lone founder startups (only one founder present). It was proposed that the social context of family ties among founders leads them to a prevention focus concerned with avoiding the loss of the socio-emotional benefits of those ties. In order to avoid such a loss, family founders were expected to increase their risk perceptions and thus, explore less than lone founders, who lack such socio-emotional ties. It was also proposed that two commonly used psychological traits in entrepreneurship research —achievement motivation and internal locus of control, predispose entrepreneurs to a promotion focus. Founders with a promotion focus, in turn, were hypothesized to lead startups to more risk-seeking behaviors and to more explorative orientation. The previous argument was used as a springboard to derive hypotheses about ambidexterity (the ability to exploit and explore simultaneously) and survival hazards. Using Regulatory Focus Theory, exploitative orientation, conceptualized as the motivational strength to continue on previous paths of action, was hypothesized to be not significantly different from that of lone founder startups. Taking previous arguments together, lone founder startups were hypothesized to be more ambidextrous than family startups. Finally, ambidexterity and internal locus of control were hypothesized to reduce survival hazards in family startups. The findings suggested that family startups explore less than lone founder startups even after controlling for group effects. Interesting but contradictory findings revealed that internal locus of control have both a positive direct effect and a positive interaction that increases the explorative and ambidextrous orientation gap of family startups over lone founder startups. As expected, ambidexterity and internal locus of control reduced survival hazards on family startups. Implications for practitioners were derived based on a sample of 470 nascent entrepreneurs.

An Examination of Race, Socioeconomic Status, and Individualism-Collectivsm as Moderators of the Work/Family Antecedent and Work-Family Conflict Relationship

This study examines the role of race, socioeconomic status, and individualism-collectivism as moderators of the relationship between selected work and family antecedents and work-family conflict and evaluates the contribution of energy-based conflict to the work-family conflict (WFC) research. The study uses data obtained from a survey questionnaire given to 414 participants recruited from an online labor market. Study hypotheses were tested through structural equation modeling. The results indicate that while moderating effects were slight, a proposed model where energy-based conflict is included outperforms traditional time/strain/behavior-based models and that established variables may drop to non-significance when additional variables are included in prediction. In addition, novel individual difference variables such as individualism and collectivism were demonstrated to have effects beyond moderating antecedent-outcome relationships in the model. The findings imply that WFC models would benefit from the inclusion of variables found in the current study.

Social-cognitive Antecedents of Ambidextrous Orientation in Family-owned Startups: The Role of Family Ties, Achievement Motivation, and Internal Locus of Control

Regulatory Focus Theory predicts that the motivation to self-regulate goal-directed thought and behavior depends on two distinct regulation strategies: a promotion focus based on attaining gains and a prevention focus based on avoiding losses. This study took a social-cognitive approach predicting that regulatory focus has an impact on how family startups (several family related founders) explore “new ideas”, exploit “old certainties” and achieve the balance of both (ambidexterity), compared to lone founder startups (only one founder present). It was proposed that the social context of family ties among founders leads them to a prevention focus concerned with avoiding the loss of the socio-emotional benefits of those ties. In order to avoid such a loss, family founders were expected to increase their risk perceptions and thus, explore less than lone founders, who lack such socio-emotional ties. It was also proposed that two commonly used psychological traits in entrepreneurship research --achievement motivation and internal locus of control, predispose entrepreneurs to a promotion focus. Founders with a promotion focus, in turn, were hypothesized to lead startups to more risk-seeking behaviors and to more explorative orientation. The previous argument was used as a springboard to derive hypotheses about ambidexterity (the ability to exploit and explore simultaneously) and survival hazards. Using Regulatory Focus Theory, exploitative orientation, conceptualized as the motivational strength to continue on previous paths of action, was hypothesized to be not significantly different from that of lone founder startups. Taking previous arguments together, lone founder startups were hypothesized to be more ambidextrous than family startups. Finally, ambidexterity and internal locus of control were hypothesized to reduce survival hazards in family startups. The findings suggested that family startups explore less than lone founder startups even after controlling for group effects. Interesting but contradictory findings revealed that internal locus of control have both a positive direct effect and a positive interaction that increases the explorative and ambidextrous orientation gap of family startups over lone founder startups. As expected, ambidexterity and internal locus of control reduced survival hazards on family startups. Implications for practitioners were derived based on a sample of 470 nascent entrepreneurs.