A Latent Profile Analysis of Body Image and Disordered Eating Attitudes and Behaviors in Adolescent Boys.

In education systems characterized by persistent socioeconomic disparities, the phenomenon of academic resilience, defined as performing at a high level despite socioeconomic disadvantage, challenges deterministic models of educational achievement (Wang et al. ). Students who demonstrate academic resilience are those who perform well at school despite facing an increased risk of academic failure associated with socioeconomic disadvantage, such as low family socioeconomic status (SES). Various methods are used in the literature to study this phenomenon (Rudd et al. ). Among these, the definition‐based approach explicitly identifies a sub‐sample of resilient students and compares them to a group of non‐resilient peers facing similar socio‐economic constraints, in contrast to variable‐centered or model‐based approaches that conceptualize resilience as a continuous or latent construct (Rudd et al. ). By directly contrasting students exposed to comparable levels of socioeconomic risk but exhibiting divergent academic outcomes, the definition‐based approach enables theoretically grounded and empirically transparent comparisons of cognitive and socio‐emotional characteristics. According to this theoretical framework, resilient students are defined as members of groups at elevated risk of low educational attainment who nonetheless achieve high levels of academic performance. For instance, in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), resilient students are defined as those in the bottom quartile of the national socioeconomic distribution who achieve scores in the top quartile of academic performance (Schneider et al. ). Whereas some alternative approaches combine indicators of socioeconomic risk and academic performance into a single construct, the definition‐based approach clearly distinguishes exposure to disadvantage from academic outcomes by jointly but explicitly defining low SES and high achievement. This distinction allows for more precise comparisons between disadvantaged students who succeed academically and those who do not, thereby facilitating the identification of factors associated with academic success under conditions of socioeconomic constraint. This perspective is particularly informative in educational contexts characterized by persistent inequalities. SES‐related educational inequalities are a global issue, as evidenced by meta‐analyses conducted across diverse national contexts (Kim et al. ; Liu et al. ; Selvitopu and Kaya ; Sirin ). Although international assessment data indicate that France is among the OECD countries with the most pronounced educational inequalities related to family SES (OECD ), French data are largely absent from existing meta‐analyses. Yet, evidence shows that SES‐based disparities in France emerge as early as the compulsory school entry age of three (Cioldi et al. ), and continue to widen throughout primary and secondary education (Delarue et al. ; Murat ). More advantaged students not only begin secondary school with stronger academic skills but also show faster progress in both mathematics and language compared to their less advantaged peers (Delarue et al. ). Specifically, by age 15, SES explains 21% of the variance in mathematics achievement and 17% in reading outcomes (OECD ). Understanding the mechanisms that promote academic resilience is therefore particularly critical in the French context, where early and persistent SES‐related inequalities call for evidence‐based strategies to support the success of disadvantaged students. Despite growing interest in academic resilience, limited research has explored the socio‐emotional characteristics that may distinguish resilient students from their non‐resilient peers in the French educational context. Among the potential factors, motivation and self‐efficacy have been identified because they are consistently associated with academic success (Basileo et al. ; Haidari et al. ; Qi et al. ; Steinmayr and Spinath ). Self‐efficacy reflects students' belief in their ability to perform a specific academic task (Bandura and Wessels ). This belief extends beyond general confidence and is grounded in four primary sources: mastery experiences, vicarious learning, verbal persuasion, and individuals' physiological and emotional states (Bandura and Wessels ). High self‐efficacy fosters perseverance in the face of challenges, such as when a student enrolls in an advanced course despite its complexity, because they believe in their ability to learn. Conversely, low self‐efficacy can lead to avoidance or early withdrawal. Motivation can be divided into two dimensions according to self‐determination theory: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Deci and Ryan ; Ryan and Deci ). Intrinsic motivation emerges from a genuine interest in learning, while extrinsic motivation depends on external rewards or social pressures. However, this dichotomy is not absolute: extrinsic motivation can become autonomous if the student integrates th