| Literature DB >> 35370824 |
Ruohang Wang1, Youteng Gan1, Xueyu Wang1, Jianye Li2, Małgorzata Lipowska3, Bernadetta Izydorczyk4, Shuai Guo2, Mariusz Lipowski2, Yin Yang1, Hongying Fan1.
Abstract
Objective: Body-image disturbance and eating disorders are significant physical and mental health problems in China. Attitudes toward the body are thought to work in conjunction with other established risk factors for dietary pathology, which include body dissatisfaction, dieting, and negative effects. Negative appearance evaluation may be valuable for extending our understanding of measuring factors and potential causal relationships associated with body image and eating problems. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the association between negative appearance evaluation and a combination of eating attitudes and sociocultural attitudes toward appearance and the mediating effect of negative appearance evaluation on the relationship between eating attitudes and sociocultural attitudes toward appearance.Entities:
Keywords: EAT-26; FNAES; SATAQ 3; body image; sociocultural influence
Year: 2022 PMID: 35370824 PMCID: PMC8964953 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.776842
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychiatry ISSN: 1664-0640 Impact factor: 4.157
Participants’ scores on the FNAES, EAT-26, and SATAQ scales.
| Variables | Category (N) | FNAES | EAT-26 | SATAQ | ||||||
| Dieting | Bulimia | Oral control | Total score | Internalization general | Internalization athlete | Pressure | Information | |||
| Gender | Male (176) | 16.41 ± 5.67 | 6.49 ± 4.90 | 0.97 ± 1.78 | 2.14 ± 2.46 | 9.60 ± 6.54 | 25.93 ± 7.08 | 15.17 ± 2.47 | 20.68 ± 7.03 | 26.72 ± 5.14 |
| Female (163) | 17.37 ± 6.19 | 4.94 ± 4.69 | 0.82 ± 1.31 | 1.60 ± 2.06 | 7.36 ± 5.99 | 24.55 ± 6.61 | 15.02 ± 2.84 | 18.99 ± 6.74 | 25.23 ± 4.88 | |
| −1.50 | 2.97 | 0.87 | 2.16 | 3.27 | 1.85 | 0.51 | 2.25 | 2.72 | ||
| Cohen’s d | 0.16 | 0.32 | 0.10 | 0.24 | 0.36 | 0.20 | 0.06 | 0.25 | 0.30 | |
| Age | ≤24 years (140) | 18.37 ± 5.65 | 5.04 ± 5.28 | 1.02 ± 1.73 | 2.29 ± 2.45 | 8.35 ± 6.87 | 25.44 ± 6.71 | 15.28 ± 2.86 | 20.51 ± 6.55 | 25.4 ± 5.13 |
| 25∼34 years (109) | 17.06 ± 6.10 | 6.99 ± 4.67 | 1.05 ± 1.57 | 2.19 ± 2.32 | 10.23 ± 6.55 | 25.13 ± 6.25 | 15.34 ± 2.45 | 20.04 ± 6.87 | 27.54 ± 4.73 | |
| 35∼44 years (42) | 14.29 ± 5.36 | 5.86 ± 4.74 | 0.52 ± 1.25 | 0.60 ± 1.17 | 6.98 ± 5.15 | 24.14 ± 7.64 | 14.14 ± 2.23 | 18.02 ± 7.81 | 24.21 ± 5.30 | |
| 45∼54 years (26) | 14.77 ± 4.89 | 4.73 ± 3.63 | 0.65 ± 1.44 | 1.65 ± 2.21 | 7.04 ± 4.74 | 25.23 ± 7.97 | 14.65 ± 3.25 | 19.92 ± 7.93 | 26.19 ± 4.87 | |
| ≥55 years (22) | 13.82 ± 5.95 | 5.05 ± 3.20 | 0.41 ± 1.05 | 0.41 ± 0.91 | 5.86 ± 3.34 | 27.05 ± 8.27 | 15.14 ± 1.81 | 18.45 ± 6.46 | 25.41 ± 4.31 | |
| F value |
|
| 1.75 |
|
| 0.68 | 1.96 | 1.29 |
| |
| η2 | 0.08 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.09 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.05 | |
| BMI | ≤18.4 Thin (40) | 17.73 ± 5.44 | 4.33 ± 4.97 | 1.53 ± 2.48 | 3.90 ± 3.26 | 9.75 ± 7.20 | 24.30 ± 5.64 | 15.23 ± 3.31 | 22.00 ± 6.86 | 25.93 ± 4.40 |
| 18.5∼23.9 Normal (206) | 17.39 ± 6.04 | 6.05 ± 5.03 | 0.92 ± 1.38 | 1.97 ± 2.11 | 8.94 ± 6.45 | 25.90 ± 6.72 | 15.41 ± 2.56 | 20.65 ± 6.49 | 26.55 ± 5.04 | |
| 24.0∼27.9 Overweight (63) | 15.65 ± 6.23 | 5.75 ± 4.70 | 0.57 ± 1.42 | 0.78 ± 1.44 | 7.10 ± 6.16 | 24.32 ± 7.48 | 14.52 ± 2.49 | 17.32 ± 7.48 | 25.02 ± 5.28 | |
| ≥28 Obesity (30) | 14.77 ± 4.31 | 5.53 ± 3.42 | 0.60 ± 1.38 | 0.90 ± 1.24 | 7.03 ± 4.26 | 24.2 ± 8.00 | 14.03 ± 2.24 | 17.03 ± 6.88 | 24.43 ± 5.16 | |
| F value |
| 1.43 |
|
| 2.42 | 1.50 |
|
| 2.60 | |
| η2 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.15 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.02 | |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001; ps valued smaller than 0.05 were bolded for clarity. And one-way analysis of variance tests (ANOVA) was used for analyses by age, residence, or BMI. abc the same letter means that there is no difference between pairwise comparisons within the group and different letters mean that there is a difference. (N = 339, Mean ± SD).
Correlation between FNAES, EAT-26, and SATAQ-3 scores.
| FNAES | Dieting | Bulimia | Oral control | EAT-26 (total score) | Internalization general | Internalization athlete | Pressure | Information | |
| FNAES | 1 | ||||||||
| Dieting |
| 1 | |||||||
| Bulimia |
|
| 1 | ||||||
| Oral control | 0.04 | 0.08 |
| 1 | |||||
| EAT-26 (Total score) |
|
|
|
| 1 | ||||
| Internalization general |
| −0.04 | 0.08 | −0.06 | −0.03 | 1 | |||
| Internalization athlete |
| −0.01 | −0.01 | 0.01 | −0.01 |
| 1 | ||
| Pressure |
| −0.05 |
| 0.08 | 0.02 |
|
| 1 | |
| Information |
| 0.11 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 1 |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01; ps valued smaller than 0.05 were bolded for clarity.
FIGURE 1Path analysis of the relationship between FNAES, EAT-26, and SATAQ-3 scores of the participants.
Bootstrap analysis of the mediation effect size and significance test of FNAES in EAT-26 and SATAQ.
| Path | Standardized effect size | Standard error | Effect size | p | 95%CI |
| (Effect) | (Boot SE) | (%) | |||
| EAT-26→SATAQ | 0.04 | 0.12 | 29.91 | 0.40 | [−0.19, 0.19] |
| (Direct effect) | |||||
| EAT-26→FNAES→SATAQ |
| 0.07 | 70.09 | 0.01 | [0.01, 0.29] |
| (Mediation effect) | |||||
| EAT-26→SATAQ |
| 0.09 | 100.00 | 0.04 | [0.01, 0.38] |
| (Total effect) |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01; ps valued smaller than 0.05 were bolded for clarity.