Page "Bulimia nervosa" Paragraph 48

In contrast, Byrne and Mclean ’ s findings differed slightly from Fairburn et al .’ s cognitive behavioral model of bulimia nervosa in that the drive for thinness was the major cause of purging as a way of controlling weight.

In turn, Byrne and Mclean argued that this makes the individual vulnerable to binging, indicating that it is not a binge-purge cycle but rather a purge-binge cycle in that purging comes before binging.

Similarly, Fairburn et al .’ s cognitive behavioral model of bulimia nervosa is not necessarily applicable to every individual and is certainly reductionist.

Everyone differs from another, and taking such a complex behavior like bulimia and applying the same one theory to everyone would certainly be invalid.

In addition, the cognitive behavioral model of bulimia nervosa is very cultural bound in that it may not be necessarily applicable to cultures outside of the Western society.

To evaluate, Fairburn et al .’ s model and more generally the cognitive explanation of bulimia nervosa is more descriptive than explanatory, as it does not necessarily explain how bulimia arises.

Furthermore, it is difficult to ascertain cause and effect, because it may be that distorted eating leads to distorted cognition rather than vice versa.