C Blair Burnette1, Alexandria E Davies2, Rachel L Boutté2, Suzanne E Mazzeo3. 1. Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, P.O. Box 842018, Richmond, VA, 23284-2018, USA. burnettecb@vcu.edu. 2. Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, P.O. Box 842018, Richmond, VA, 23284-2018, USA. 3. Departments of Psychology and Pediatrics, Virginia Commonwealth University, P.O. Box 842018, Richmond, VA, 23284-2018, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Accumulating evidence suggests weight suppression (WS) is related to disordered eating and eating disorder (ED) risk in non-clinical samples; however, research to-date has not examined the intentionality of, or motivations for, WS. The purpose of this study was to: (1) qualitatively assess WS motivation in undergraduates, and (2) explore differences in body image and eating behaviors across motivation categories. METHODS: In the first study, responses from 192 undergraduates were evaluated using inductive content analysis; four primary motivation categories emerged: appearance, functional, sports/military, and unintentional. In a second study, 1033 undergraduates indicated their primary WS motivation, if applicable, and completed body image and eating behavior measures. Separate analyses were run by gender; covariates included current body mass index (BMI) and WS. RESULTS: Differences in body image and eating behaviors emerged across motivation categories for both men (p < 0.001) and women (p < 0.001). Appearance-motivated WS in men, and appearance and sports/military-motivated WS in women, were related to greater body dissatisfaction, restraint, thin-ideal internalization, and ED risk. Undergraduates with intentional WS demonstrated higher body dissatisfaction and eating pathology than undergraduates with unintentional or no WS (all ps < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Assessing weight history and WS motivations could be a brief, low-cost intervention to improve identification of undergraduates at greatest risk for EDs. This information could be integrated into campus marketing campaigns promoting wellness. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Cross-sectional descriptive study, Level V.
PURPOSE: Accumulating evidence suggests weight suppression (WS) is related to disordered eating and eating disorder (ED) risk in non-clinical samples; however, research to-date has not examined the intentionality of, or motivations for, WS. The purpose of this study was to: (1) qualitatively assess WS motivation in undergraduates, and (2) explore differences in body image and eating behaviors across motivation categories. METHODS: In the first study, responses from 192 undergraduates were evaluated using inductive content analysis; four primary motivation categories emerged: appearance, functional, sports/military, and unintentional. In a second study, 1033 undergraduates indicated their primary WS motivation, if applicable, and completed body image and eating behavior measures. Separate analyses were run by gender; covariates included current body mass index (BMI) and WS. RESULTS: Differences in body image and eating behaviors emerged across motivation categories for both men (p < 0.001) and women (p < 0.001). Appearance-motivated WS in men, and appearance and sports/military-motivated WS in women, were related to greater body dissatisfaction, restraint, thin-ideal internalization, and ED risk. Undergraduates with intentional WS demonstrated higher body dissatisfaction and eating pathology than undergraduates with unintentional or no WS (all ps < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Assessing weight history and WS motivations could be a brief, low-cost intervention to improve identification of undergraduates at greatest risk for EDs. This information could be integrated into campus marketing campaigns promoting wellness. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Cross-sectional descriptive study, Level V.
Entities:
Keywords:
Body image; Disordered eating; Undergraduates; Weight suppression
Authors: Christopher Warner; Carolynn Warner; Theresa Matuszak; James Rachal; Julianne Flynn; Thomas A Grieger Journal: Mil Med Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 1.437
Authors: Sarah Ketchen Lipson; J Megan Jones; C Barr Taylor; Denise E Wilfley; Dawn M Eichen; Ellen E Fitzsimmons-Craft; Daniel Eisenberg Journal: Eat Behav Date: 2016-04-09