Display options
Cite
Cororve Fingeret M, Gleaves DH, Pearson CA. On the methodology of body image assessment: the use of figural rating scales to evaluate body dissatisfaction and the ideal body standards of women. Body Image. 2004;1(2):207-12doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.01.003.
Cororve Fingeret, M., Gleaves, D. H., & Pearson, C. A. (2004). On the methodology of body image assessment: the use of figural rating scales to evaluate body dissatisfaction and the ideal body standards of women. Body image, 1(2), 207-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.01.003
Cororve Fingeret, Michelle, et al. "On the methodology of body image assessment: the use of figural rating scales to evaluate body dissatisfaction and the ideal body standards of women." Body image vol. 1,2 (2004): 207-12. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.01.003
Cororve Fingeret M, Gleaves DH, Pearson CA. On the methodology of body image assessment: the use of figural rating scales to evaluate body dissatisfaction and the ideal body standards of women. Body Image. 2004 May;1(2):207-12. doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.01.003. PMID: 18089153.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Body Image. 2004 May;1(2):207-12. doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.01.003.

On the methodology of body image assessment: the use of figural rating scales to evaluate body dissatisfaction and the ideal body standards of women.

Body image

Michelle Cororve Fingeret, David H Gleaves, Crystal A Pearson

Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-4235, USA.

PMID: 18089153 DOI: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.01.003

Abstract

We examined the use of figural rating scales to measure body dissatisfaction and the ideal body standards of women. We also attended to the potential influence of demand characteristics in body assessment research using these measures, a methodological concern largely ignored in this field. We used both within- and between-subjects designs to assess whether women hold different body standards for themselves compared to their same sex peers and whether their own ideal body size (IBS) is different from what they think men prefer. Regardless of the method of data collection (within or between design), we failed to find any differences on separate items of body image ideals. The findings do provide evidence of robust and large effects for the current-ideal discrepancy as measured by figural rating scales, but argue against including multiple questions about ideal body preferences on these types of scales. Concerns about the influence of demand characteristics were not supported by the data.

Publication Types