Anita Jansen1, Vera Voorwinde2, Yvette Hoebink2, Marlies Rekkers3, Carolien Martijn4, Sandra Mulkens5. 1. Clinical Psychological Science, Maastricht University, The Netherlands. Electronic address: a.jansen@maastrichtuniversity.nl. 2. Health & Social Psychology Master, Maastricht University, The Netherlands. 3. Maatschap De Praktijk, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Clinical Psychological Science, Maastricht University, The Netherlands. 5. Clinical Psychological Science, Maastricht University, The Netherlands; Virenze Riagg Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Though there is some evidence that body exposure increases body satisfaction, it is still unclear why exposure works and how attention should be guided during exposure. This pilot study manipulates the focus of attention during body exposure. METHODS:Female participants high in body dissatisfaction were randomly assigned to an exposure intervention that exclusively focused on self-defined attractive (n = 11) or self-defined unattractive (n = 11) body parts. Both interventions consisted of five exposure sessions and homework. Outcome and process of change were studied. RESULTS: Both types of exposure were equally effective and led to significant improvements in body satisfaction, body checking, body concerns, body avoidance and mood at post-test. Improvements for body satisfaction and mood were maintained at follow-up while body shape concerns and body checking still improved between post-test and follow-up. Body avoidance improvements were maintained for the positive exposure while the negative exposure tended to further decrease long-term body avoidance at follow-up.. The 'positive' exposure induced positive feelings during all exposure sessions while the 'negative' exposure initially induced a worsening of feelings but feelings started to improve after some sessions. The most unattractive body part was rated increasingly attractive in both conditions though this increase was significantly larger in the negative compared to the positive exposure condition. LIMITATIONS: The sample size was small and non-clinical. CONCLUSIONS: Both types of exposure might be effective and clinically useful. Negative exposure is emotionally hard but might be significantly more effective in increasing the perceived attractiveness of loathed body parts and in decreasing avoidance behavior.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Though there is some evidence that body exposure increases body satisfaction, it is still unclear why exposure works and how attention should be guided during exposure. This pilot study manipulates the focus of attention during body exposure. METHODS: Female participants high in body dissatisfaction were randomly assigned to an exposure intervention that exclusively focused on self-defined attractive (n = 11) or self-defined unattractive (n = 11) body parts. Both interventions consisted of five exposure sessions and homework. Outcome and process of change were studied. RESULTS: Both types of exposure were equally effective and led to significant improvements in body satisfaction, body checking, body concerns, body avoidance and mood at post-test. Improvements for body satisfaction and mood were maintained at follow-up while body shape concerns and body checking still improved between post-test and follow-up. Body avoidance improvements were maintained for the positive exposure while the negative exposure tended to further decrease long-term body avoidance at follow-up.. The 'positive' exposure induced positive feelings during all exposure sessions while the 'negative' exposure initially induced a worsening of feelings but feelings started to improve after some sessions. The most unattractive body part was rated increasingly attractive in both conditions though this increase was significantly larger in the negative compared to the positive exposure condition. LIMITATIONS: The sample size was small and non-clinical. CONCLUSIONS: Both types of exposure might be effective and clinically useful. Negative exposure is emotionally hard but might be significantly more effective in increasing the perceived attractiveness of loathed body parts and in decreasing avoidance behavior.
Authors: Tyler B Mason; Jason M Lavender; Stephen A Wonderlich; Ross D Crosby; Scott G Engel; James E Mitchell; Scott J Crow; Daniel Le Grange; Carol B Peterson Journal: Eat Weight Disord Date: 2017-06-06 Impact factor: 4.652
Authors: Marta Miragall; Ernestina Etchemendy; Ausiàs Cebolla; Víctor Rodríguez; Carlos Medrano; Rosa María Baños Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-03-23 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Bruno Porras-Garcia; Eduardo Serrano-Troncoso; Marta Carulla-Roig; Pau Soto-Usera; Marta Ferrer-Garcia; Natàlia Figueras-Puigderrajols; Lena Yilmaz; Yigit Onur Sen; Nazila Shojaeian; José Gutiérrez-Maldonado Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2020-05-15
Authors: Katherine Schaumberg; Erin E Reilly; Sasha Gorrell; Cheri A Levinson; Nicholas R Farrell; Tiffany A Brown; Kathryn M Smith; Lauren M Schaefer; Jamal H Essayli; Ann F Haynos; Lisa M Anderson Journal: Clin Psychol Rev Date: 2020-11-11
Authors: April Karlinsky; Holly Howe; Melissa de Jonge; Alan Kingstone; Catherine M Sabiston; Timothy N Welsh Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-04 Impact factor: 3.390