Undersökningen har genomförts i en förskola och en förskoleklass där totalt tjugo barn har deltagit. Den syftar till att undersöka hur kunskapen skiljer sig mellan fyraåringar och sexåringar. Kvalitativa intervjuer och löpande observationer användes som metod för att ta reda på uppfattningar om människokroppens inre organ samt vad barnen anser händer med maten som vi äter. I undersökningen användes en plastmodell av en kropp som barnen både fick peka på och säga organens namn. Resultatet visar att sexåringar generellt har bättre uppfattning när det gäller organens namn och vad organen gör i vår kropp. Däremot har båda åldersgrupperna en likvärdig uppfattning när det gäller att peka ut organ och benämna det rätt. Sexåringarna var också bättre på vad de anser händer med maten vi äter i jämförelse med fyraåringarna. Det tycks vara åldern hos barnen som påverkar vad barnen kan i störst utsträckning, där personliga erfarenheter tycks spela in vid enstaka tillfällen. / This study was conducted in a kindergarten and a preschool where a total of twenty children have attended. It aims to investigate how knowledge differs between four-year and six-year-old children. Qualitative interviews and current observations were used as methods to find out the perceptions of the human body's internal organs, as well as what the children think happens to the food we eat. The study used a plastic model of a body that the children both got the chance to point at as well as name the organs. The results show that six year olds generally have better perceptions of the organs name and what they are doing in our body. However, both age groups had a similar view when it comes to point out an organ and name it correctly. Six year olds were also better at what they think happens to the food we eat compared to four year olds. It seems to be the age of the children that have the biggest affects on their knowledge, but it can also be their experiences that are the main factor in a few cases.

The eating disorder literature has long suggested that sociocultural experiences specific to women influence development of bulimic pathology; however, models have differed on the type of experiences that are important and what other variables interact with these experiences to lead to eating pathology. Broader sociocultural theory and objectification theory represent two such differing models, and more recently Moradi hypothesized that integrating elements from both models would provide a better picture of eating disorder development. The present study, therefore, sought to compare these three different models of bulimic pathology development to determine which one provides the best explanation for bulimic outcomes. The sample consisted of 682 undergraduate women between the ages of 18 and 24, recruited from a large southwestern university. Data were collected on-line using a series of questionnaires to measure the constructs of interest and analyzed using structural equation modeling. All three models fit the data well and explained approximately 50% of bulimic outcomes; however, the model based on Moradi’s integrated model provided the most information about the relationships between constructs within the model. The development of bulimic symptomatology appears best explained by a model that focuses on the sociocultural experience of pressures about weight and body size, but also integrates aspects of objectification theory as well. Future research, however, is needed to determine if sexually objectifying experiences, if measured differently, affect women’s development of eating pathology along with pressures.