It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Introduction Objectification theory argues that self-objectification confers risk for disordered eating (DE) both directly, and indirectly through a cascade of negative psychological consequences (e.g. low mood and self-conscious body monitoring). Robust cross-sectional evidence supports these relationships. However, these cross-sectional studies do not provide evidence for the complex intraindividual psychological processes outlined in objectification theory which purportedly contribute to DE. Objectives Using an ecological momentary assessment design, the current study investigated the direct within-person effect between state self-objectification and DE and examined the indirect within-person effect of negative mood and body comparisons, on the relationship between state self-objectification and DE. Methods Two-hundred female participants (M=20.43 years, SD=4.60) downloaded a smartphone app which assessed momentary experiences of self-objectification, mood, body comparisons, and DE six times per day at random intervals for seven days. Results Indicated that self-objectification significantly predicted DE behaviours [95% CI 0.01, 0.03] and body comparisons [95% CI 0.32, 0.41]. However, the indirect effect of body comparisons on the relationship between state self-objectification and DE was not significant [95% CI -0.01, 0.00]. In the second mediation model, self-objectification significantly predicted DE behaviours [95% CI 0.01, 0.03], but did not significantly predict mood [95% CI -0.06, 0.03]. Similarly, the indirect effect of mood on the relationship between state self-objectification and DE was not significant [95% CI -0.00, 0.00]. Conclusions These results enhance our understanding of objectification theory and suggest that self-objectification confers risk to DE directly. However, our findings do not support the indirect effect of self-objectification on DE through low mood or body comparisons. Disclosure No significant relationships.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Melbourne School Of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia
2 Psychology, Institute of Social Neurosciences Psychology College, Ivanhoe, Australia
3 Centre For Social And Early Emotional Development, Deakin University, Burwood, Australia