The current literature presents a variety of alternative theories on the neuro-psychological processes explaining anorexia.

Essay Question: The current literature presents a variety of alternative theories on the neuro-psychological processes explaining anorexia. Select one of these theories (it is up to you which one to select, as long this is well established in the literature), illustrate it, and critically evaluate it discussing relevant empirical evidence and its advantages and shortcomings (also comparing it with alternative perspectives, if relevant).** The topics discussed in the lecture and the essential readings (attached below in the files) provide the basic information that you should consider in your answers. However, you are encouraged to consider also other sources.As long as the material is relevant to the question and is based on scientific literature, you can include this material in your answers. Topics discussed:– 2 Main Types of Eating Disorders: Anorexia Nervosa, Bulimia Nervosa – Cognitive neuroscience of Hunger: Homeostatic motivational processes, Hypothalamus and eating, Lipostatic hypothesis, short term eating regulation, non-homeostatic processes, dopamine and food- Cognitive Neuroscience models of Anorexia: Models emphasising food related processesModel 1: Anorexia is the consequence of altered food-related homeostatic (hypothalamus mediated) motivational processes. Lesioned hypothalamus? Lower set point? Model 2: Anorexia is the consequence of altered non-homeostatic (dopamine mediated) processes related with food. Possibly food activates dopamine less in anorexia? Model 3: Anorexia is the consequence of a general alteration in dopaminergic reward processing. Model 4: Anorexia is the consequence of controlling personality.Model 5: Anorexia is the consequence of impaired awareness of the body sensation.*I have also included a presentation slideshow for more information of what was discussed.

Feedback on the essay will be evaluation in each of the four categories of: Knowledge & Understanding; Analysis/Synthesis; Evidence, Structure, Logic, Clarity & Argument; Appropriate referencing, indicating the degree class at which performance on each of these criteria is demonstrated.

Marking Criteria

1. Exceptionally detailed knowledge of theories/concepts relevant to the field, with acute awareness of limitations in the field. Richly illustrated using vivid and informative examples, demonstrating a deep level of understanding.
2. Exceptionally high-quality analysis, developed independently or through effective collaboration of independent and taught materials. Judiciously selected and critically evaluated evidence. Excellent ability to investigate contradictory information and identify reasons for contradictions.
3. Exceptionally logical work, and highly persuasive arguments.
4. Professional quality and clarity of expression. Excellently structured, focused and well written assessment that clearly flows and provides a compelling argument throughout. The purpose is clear from start to finish. Highly persuasive conclusions.
5. APA formatting consistently applied.