| Literature DB >> 29447251 |
Leah N Tobin1, Christopher R Sears1, Alicia S Zumbusch1, Kristin M von Ranson1.
Abstract
Understanding the cognitive processes underlying body dissatisfaction provides important information on the development and perpetuation of eating pathology. Previous research suggests that body-dissatisfied women process weight-related information differently than body-satisfied women, but the precise nature of these processing differences is not yet understood. In this study, eye-gaze tracking was used to measure attention to weight-related words in body-dissatisfied (n = 40) and body-satisfied (n = 38) women, before and after exposure to images of thin fashion models. Participants viewed 8-second displays containing fat-related, thin-related, and neutral words while their eye fixations were tracked and recorded. Based on previous research and theory, we predicted that body-dissatisfied women would attend to fat-related words more than body-satisfied women and would attend to thin-related words less. It was also predicted that exposure to thin model images would increase self-rated body dissatisfaction and heighten group differences in attention. The results indicated that body-dissatisfied women attended to both fat- and thin-related words more than body-satisfied women and that exposure to thin models did not increase this effect. Implications for cognitive models of eating disorders are discussed.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29447251 PMCID: PMC5813977 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192914
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Descriptive and inferential statistics for fat-related, thin-related, and neutral words.
| Fat-related Words | Thin-related Words | Neutral Words | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Word characteristic | |||||
| 6.04 (1.84) | 7.00 (2.84) | 6.52 (2.40) | 1.00 | .370 | |
| 11.28 (20.66) | 13.88 (30.50) | 14.01 (28.32) | .10 | .901 | |
| –1.35 (0.55) | –0.38 (1.25) | –0.16 (1.05) | 36.06 | < .001 | |
Normative frequency = frequency of the word in the English language per million words, determined using the SUBTLEXus database (http://subtlexus.lexique.org/); Rated valence = average rated valence on a scale from –3 (“very negative”) to +3 (“very positive”).
Attentional bias scores for body-satisfied and body-dissatisfied women.
| Body-Satisfied ( | Body-Dissatisfied ( | |
|---|---|---|
| Fat-related words | 23.40 (4.77) | 26.39 (5.02) |
| Thin-related words | 24.29 (3.86) | 26.92 (4.69) |
| Fat-related words | 24.58 (4.75) | 27.66 (5.80) |
| Thin-related words | 25.08 (4.24) | 26.82 (4.80) |
| Fat-related words | 8.74 (6.42) | 10.06 (6.89) |
| Thin-related words | 7.56 (6.22) | 9.10 (4.39) |
| Fat-related words | 7.62 (5.57) | 10.25 (6.43) |
| Thin-related words | 7.16 (3.86) | 8.07 (6.92) |
Pre-prime = before exposure to the thin model images; Post-prime = after exposure to the thin model images; Attentional maintenance bias score = time spent fixating on fat- and thin-related words as a percentage of the total time spent fixating on all four words in each word set; Attention re-engagement bias score = total number of times a fat- or thin-related word was the first word to be re-fixated as a percentage of the total number of trials that had at least one re-fixation.
Fig 1Attentional maintenance bias scores for fat-related versus thin-related words in body-satisfied and body-dissatisfied women, averaged across priming conditions.
Attentional maintenance bias scores were calculated as the time spent fixating on fat- and thin-related words (total fixation times summed across all trials) as a percentage of the total time spent fixating on all four words in each word set over the 8-second presentations.
Fig 2Attentional maintenance bias scores for weight-related words averaged across fat- and thin-related words, for each 4-second interval of the 8-second presentation, prior to the thin model prime.
Attentional maintenance bias scores were calculated as the time spent fixating on fat- and thin-related words (total fixation times summed across all trials) as a percentage of the total time spent fixating on all four words in each word set.