| Literature DB >> 26140215 |
Rachel Cohen1, Alex Blaszczynski1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Appearance comparison has consistently been shown to engender body image dissatisfaction. To date, most studies have demonstrated this relationship between appearance comparison and body image dissatisfaction in the context of conventional media images depicting the thin-ideal. Social comparison theory posits that people are more likely to compare themselves to similar others. Since social media forums such as Facebook involve one's peers, the current study aimed to determine whether the relationship between appearance comparison and body image dissatisfaction would be stronger for those exposed to social media images, compared to conventional media images.Entities:
Keywords: Appearance comparison; Body image dissatisfaction; Social media
Year: 2015 PMID: 26140215 PMCID: PMC4489037 DOI: 10.1186/s40337-015-0061-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Eat Disord ISSN: 2050-2974
Correlation Matrix of Study Variables (n = 193)
| Age | BMI | EAT | Pre-BID | BID-change score | Pre-Self-esteem | Pre-Thin-ideal internalisation | AC | Extent of Facebook use | Facebook activity similar to study | Personally identify with stimuli | Stimuli similar to everyday exposure | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 1 | .184* | -.001 | -.121 | -.121 | .222** | -.022 | -.211** | -.134 | .000 | -.075 | -.149* |
| BMI | 1 | .157* | .235** | .011 | -.016 | .189** | .047 | .003 | .080 | -.118 | -.034 | |
| EAT | 1 | .397** | .172* | -.295** | .450** | .494** | .166* | .180* | .215** | -.008 | ||
| Pre-BID | 1 | .001 | -.572** | .373** | .485** | .196** | .162* | .071 | -.048 | |||
| BID-change score | 1 | -.144* | .312** | .357** | .013 | .091 | .101 | -.095 | ||||
| Pre-Self-esteem | 1 | -.302** | -.374** | -.069 | -.051 | -.114 | .003 | |||||
| Pre-Thin-ideal internalisation | 1 | .543** | .120 | .173* | .150* | -.131 | ||||||
| AC | 1 | .173* | .229** | .327** | .042 | |||||||
| Extent of Facebook use | 1 | .276** | .021 | .108 | ||||||||
| Facebook activity similar to study | 1 | .051 | .129 | |||||||||
| Personally identify with stimuli | 1 | .070 | ||||||||||
| Stimuli similar to everyday exposure | 1 |
Note. BMI, Body Mass Index; EAT, Eating Attitudes Test; Pre-BID, Pre-exposure Body Image Dissatisfaction; BID-change score, Body Image dissatisfaction change score; AC, Appearance Comparison
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
Descriptive Statistics for Pre-BID, Post-BID and BID-Change Scores in Both Exposure Groups
| Pre-BID | Post-BID | BID-change score (Post-Pre) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Media ( | 2.939 | .664 | 3.062 | .705 | .123 | .289 |
| Facebook ( | 2.960 | .600 | 3.180 | .677 | .220 | .274 |
Summary of the Hierarchical Regression Analysis Predicting BID-Change (n = 193)
| Model | Variable |
|
| β |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Intercept | -.081 | .162 | ||||
| Pre-thin-ideal internalisation | .015 | .004 | .296 | .000** | |||
| Pre-self-esteem | -.030 | .040 | -.055 | .451 | |||
| .100 | .100 | ||||||
| 2 | Intercept | -.136 | .178 | ||||
| Pre-thin-ideal internalisation | .007 | .004 | .136 | .110 | |||
| Pre-self-esteem | -.005 | .041 | -.010 | .895 | |||
| AC | .066 | .020 | .267 | .001** | |||
| Exposure | .054 | .041 | .096 | .182 | |||
| .155 | .055 | ||||||
| 3 | Intercept | -.139 | .178 | ||||
| Pre-thin-ideal internalisation | .007 | .004 | .136 | .108 | |||
| Pre-self-esteem | -.013 | .043 | -.023 | .764 | |||
| AC | .073 | .024 | .298 | .002** | |||
| Exposure | .056 | .041 | .098 | .172 | |||
| AC*exposure | -.022 | .035 | -.057 | .540 | |||
| .157 | .002 |
Note. The dependent variable was BID-change; B = unstandardized regression coefficient; SEB = standard error of the coefficient; β = standardized coefficient; *p < .05, **p < .01
Comparison of the Hierarchical Regression Analyses Predicting BID-Change for Each Type of Exposure (Media and Facebook)
| Media Exposure ( | Facebook Exposure ( | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Variable |
|
| β |
|
|
|
|
|
| β |
|
|
|
|
| Intercept | −0.077 | 0.267 | 0.053 | 0.225 | |||||||||||
| 1 | Pre-thin-ideal internalisation | 0.014 | 0.007 | 0.238 | 2.011 | 0.047* | 0.014 | 0.005 | 0.273 | 2.803 | 0.006** | ||||
| Pre-self-esteem | −0.028 | 0.059 | −0.056 | −0.471 | 0.639 | −0.056 | 0.059 | −0.093 | −0.952 | 0.344 | |||||
| 0.073 | 0.073 | 0.092 | 0.092 | ||||||||||||
| 2 | Intercept | −0.251 | 0.291 | −0.050 | 0.219 | ||||||||||
| Pre-thin-ideal internalisation | 0.009 | 0.007 | 0.161 | 1.25 | 0.215 | 0.006 | 0.005 | 0.116 | 1.086 | 0.280 | |||||
| Pre-self-esteem | 0.012 | 0.065 | 0.025 | 0.189 | 0.851 | −0.034 | 0.057 | −0.057 | −0.607 | 0.545 | |||||
| Appearance comparison | 0.054 | 0.037 | 0.200 | 1.440 | 0.153 | 0.074 | 0.024 | 0.330 | 3.093 | 0.003** | |||||
| 0.094 | 0.022 | 0.173 | 0.081 | ||||||||||||
Note. The dependent variable was BID-change; B = unstandardized regression coefficient; SEB = standard error of the coefficient; β = standardized coefficient
*p < .05, **p < .01
Summary of the Multiple Regression Analysis Predicting Baseline BID (n = 193)
| Variable |
|
| β |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 3.473 | .337 | |||
| Pre-self-esteem | -.608 | .075 | -.487 | .000** | |
| Pre-thin-ideal internalisation | .021 | .007 | .182 | .004** | |
| BMI | .029 | .009 | .195 | .001** | |
| Extent of Facebook use | .007 | .003 | .136 | .021* | |
| .403 |
Note. The dependent variable was baseline BID; B = unstandardized regression coefficient
SEB = standard error of the coefficient; β = standardized coefficient; *p < .05, **p < .01