Body Image 8 (2011) 216–223
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Body Image
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/bodyimage
Downward spirals of body surveillance and weight/shape concern among African
American and Caucasian college women
Ellen E. Fitzsimmons, Anna M. Bardone-Cone ∗
Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
a r t i c l e
i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 27 October 2010
Received in revised form 12 April 2011
Accepted 12 April 2011
Keywords:
Objectified body consciousness
Self-objectification
Body surveillance
Weight/shape concern
Race/ethnicity
Body image
Within dominant American culture, females often learn to view themselves from an observer’s perspective and to treat themselves as objects to be looked at (i.e., self-objectification), which can result
in negative outcomes. Body surveillance (the indicator of self-objectification) has been found to predict
concern with weight/shape in predominantly Caucasian samples, but research has not yet examined
the potential reciprocal relations between body surveillance and weight/shape concern. Participants
were 226 women attending a Midwestern university (70 self-identified as African American and 156 as
Caucasian) who provided data at two time points, spaced about 5 months apart. Results revealed that
downward spirals of body surveillance and weight/shape concern were apparent for the Caucasian but
not the African American women. However, there was evidence that body surveillance helped account
for change in weight/shape concern for the African American women.
© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Introduction
Objectification theory, as construed by Fredrickson and Roberts
(1997), suggests that females are acculturated to internalize
the objectifying observer’s perspective of their bodies. This selfobjectification often occurs as a result of sexual objectification, the
experience of being treated solely as a body that exists for the
use and pleasure of others (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). It is not
uncommon for a woman to feel sexually objectified (often by men),
as her “sexual parts or functions are separated out from her person,
reduced to status of mere instruments, or else regarded as if they
were capable of representing her” (Bartky, 1990, p. 35). Such sexualization may occur in many forms, such as via sexual violence
or through gaze (i.e., visual inspection of the body; Fredrickson
& Roberts, 1997), and as previously suggested, may then “coax”
females into adopting a view of themselves as objects (Fredrickson
& Roberts, 1997, p. 177).
Further, given that Western culture positions appearance, particularly a thin figure, as central to a woman’s value as a person
(Rodin, Silberstein, & Striegel-Moore, 1984; Spitzack, 1990; Stice,
1994), many women feel they must engage in constant body
surveillance in order to ensure their compliance with cultural standards of thinness (i.e., the thin ideal; Gilbert & Thompson, 1996;
∗ Corresponding author at: Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB#3270-Davie Hall, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States.
Tel.: +1 919 962 5989.
E-mail address: [email protected] (A.M. Bardone-Cone).
1740-1445/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2011.04.003
McKinley, 2004; Thompson & Stice, 2001). Indeed, research has
indicated that body surveillance is the behavioral manifestation
of self-objectification; that is, if a woman has internalized the
observer’s perspective of her own body, she will engage in persistent body surveillance or monitoring (e.g., Moradi, 2010, 2011).
It is via this self-surveillance that many women realize there is
a discrepancy between what they see and what they feel they
ought to look like, and thus, may experience shame (i.e., not
simply negative feelings regarding the body, but about the self)
and weight/shape concern (i.e., includes dissatisfaction with the
body and such things as overvaluation of and preoccupation with
weight/shape; McKinley & Hyde, 1996; Ross & Wade, 2004). Little
is known, however, in terms of the potential reciprocal relations
between body surveillance and weight/shape concern (i.e., body
surveillance increasing weight/shape concern and weight/shape
concern increasing body surveillance) and in terms of how these
factors relate to each other in ethnic minority groups, which may
have different cultural expectations for women’s bodies. This study
seeks to test such reciprocal relations in African American and Caucasian college women.
Existing research suggests that African American women may
experience lower levels of trait self-objectification than Caucasian
women (Hebl, King, & Lin, 2004). Specifically, African American women generally report lower levels of the manifestation
of self-objectification, body surveillance (Breitkopf, Littleton, &
Berenson, 2007; Moradi & Huang, 2008); however, some studies suggest a more complex picture. For example, Harrison and
Fredrickson (2003) found that Caucasian adolescents’ state selfobjectification increased after exposure to lean female athletes
E.E. Fitzsimmons, A.M. Bardone-Cone / Body Image 8 (2011) 216–223
(e.g., gymnasts) only, while for participants of color, an increase
in state self-objectification was apparent only in response to nonlean female athletes (e.g., basketball players). There is also support
for African American women experiencing less body dissatisfaction
than Caucasian women, for whom body image disturbance has been
described as a “normative discontent” (Rodin et al., 1984). For various reasons (e.g., a more fluid sense of beauty, less reliance on media
images for comparison) and despite their larger body sizes, African
American women tend to be more satisfied with their bodies than
Caucasian women (e.g., Akan & Grilo, 1995; Altabe, 1998; Barry &
Grilo, 2002; Baugh, Mullis, Mullis, Hicks, & Peterson, 2010; Gordon,
Castro, Sitnikov, & Holm-Denoma, 2010; Roberts, Cash, Feingold,
& Johnson, 2006; Story, French, & Resnick, 1995; Wildes, Emery, &
Simons, 2001). However, there is some evidence that effect sizes
are typically in the small to medium range (Grabe & Hyde, 2006)
and that ethnic differences in body dissatisfaction may be diminishing (Roberts et al., 2006). Further, some research has not found
differences in levels of body dissatisfaction between Caucasian and
racial/ethnic minority girls and women in the United States (e.g.,
DeLeel, Hughes, Miller, Hipwell, & Theodore, 2009; Shaw, Ramirez,
Trost, Randall, & Stice, 2004). Thus, research has begun to emphasize the myriad factors that may impact whether an African American woman experiences dissatisfaction with her body (e.g., identification with White or Black culture, floating between both cultures;
Hesse-Biber, Livingstone, Ramirez, Barko, & Johnson, 2010).
Researchers have suggested that the development of
weight/shape concern can be explained at least in part by
self-objectification (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997; McKinley,
1998; McKinley & Hyde, 1996). Indeed, given cultural standards of thinness and unrealistic ideals, self-objectification and
weight/shape concern often co-exist for those in the majority
group. Researchers have found that the body surveillance component of self-objectification is associated with weight/shape
concern in cross-sectional studies of Caucasian women (e.g.,
Knauss, Paxton, & Alsaker, 2008; Miner-Rubino, Twenge, &
Fredrickson, 2002; Muehlenkamp, Swanson, & Brausch, 2005;
Tiggemann & Lynch, 2001), but to date, what is still unknown is
whether body surveillance leads to weight/shape concern and
whether weight/shape concern leads to increased levels of body
surveillance as well. Further, research on the nature of these
relations among African American women is extremely limited.
Only two known studies to date have examined aspects of the
relation between body surveillance and weight/shape concern in
this group (i.e., Buchanan, Fischer, Tokar, & Yoder, 2008; Mitchell
& Mazzeo, 2009), but neither of these used prospective designs. To
the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to examine whether
body surveillance and weight/shape concern reciprocally influence
each other, and one of only a few studies that have examined the
relations between these factors in African American women.
Why might weight/shape concern lead to increased levels of
body surveillance? According to McKinley and Hyde (1996), constant self-surveillance is necessary to ensure that one complies with
cultural body standards and avoids negative judgments. Seemingly, when one is dissatisfied with the body or concerned with
weight/shape (e.g., not thin enough, not a culturally desirable
shape), one would continue to survey the body with the hopes of
monitoring and reducing those discrepancies. That is, when women
experience weight/shape concern, they may continue to monitor
areas that they perceive to be flawed in order to constantly ascertain
whether those areas are still discrepant with their ideal, no longer
discrepant with their ideal, etc. Weight/shape concern may prompt
efforts to resolve discrepancies between the actual and ideal selves
(e.g., dieting, wearing different clothes), and body surveillance may
be one way for a woman to figure out if such efforts are “working.” Thus, it is believed that the relation between body surveillance
and weight/shape concern should, at least in theory, be considered
217
reciprocal. We speculate that not only does body surveillance lead
to concern with weight/shape (e.g., Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997),
but that weight/shape concern likely also leads to increased surveillance and inspection of the body.
While we believe that body surveillance and weight/shape concern serially influence each other among Caucasian women, it is
not clear that the same would be true for African Americans. As
aforementioned, African American women tend to be more satisfied with their bodies than Caucasians (e.g., Barry & Grilo, 2002).
Further, even if African American women are unhappy with their
bodies, the consequences of such dissatisfaction and concern are
likely not as far-reaching as they may be for Caucasian women.
Specifically, Breitkopf et al. (2007) and Parker, Nichter, Nichter,
Vuckovic, Sims, and Ritenbaugh (1995) hypothesize that because
African American women are more likely to define attractiveness
in a multifaceted way (e.g., including such things as style and personality), they likely spend less time worrying about what others
think about their physical appearance. If attractiveness is defined in
a comprehensive manner (rather than largely dependent on body
shape, size, and weight), it seems as though constant surveillance of
the body would be less necessary and not as practical/functional of
a consequence of weight/shape concern as it might be for Caucasian
women, who are likely hoping to find and reduce any discrepancies
that exist between their own bodies and the thin ideal.
The hypothesized reciprocal relations between body surveillance and weight/shape concern underlie our hypothesis that body
surveillance and weight/shape concern interact in a downward
spiral-type fashion. Specifically, it is believed that the effects of
both body surveillance and weight/shape concern should accumulate and reciprocally spur each other as consequences. This concept
has been applied to reciprocal relations before, but with a focus on
upward spirals whereby positive affect and positive coping were
found to mutually build on each other (Burns et al., 2008). Since
the work by Burns and colleagues focused on emotional well-being,
the choice of the descriptor “upward” spirals is apt; however, since
our focus is on less healthy attitudes/behaviors, we have chosen
to describe the nature of the relations as “downward” spirals. It is
expected that the act of body surveillance will increase an individual’s weight/shape concern, and that in turn, weight/shape concern
should predict future increases in body surveillance.
In the present study, we tested hypotheses related to downward
spirals by examining body surveillance and weight/shape concern
at two time points. Specifically, our first hypothesis was that initial weight/shape concern would predict subsequent weight/shape
concern, at least in part through ongoing experiences of body
surveillance. Similarly, our second hypothesis was that initial body
surveillance would predict subsequent body surveillance, in part
through ongoing experiences of weight/shape concern. Based on
prior research, it was expected that the hypothesized relations
would hold for Caucasian college women, but because of the limited data related to African American college women and these
constructs, no specific hypotheses were generated for this group.
Support for these hypotheses would confirm the reciprocal relation
between these two constructs and the idea that body surveillance
and weight/shape concern serially influence one another in a downward spiral-type fashion.
Method
Participants
Participants at Time 1 (T1) were 276 women attending a Midwestern university; 97 (35%) described themselves as African
American/Black, and 179 as Caucasian non-Hispanic/White. At
Time 2 (T2), 70 African American women and 156 Caucasian women
provided data; all analyses and statistics reported refer to this
218
E.E. Fitzsimmons, A.M. Bardone-Cone / Body Image 8 (2011) 216–223
sample. For African American participants (i.e., those providing data
at both time points), the mean age was 19.11 years (SD = 1.75); for
Caucasian participants, the mean age was 18.53 years (SD = 0.83).
For African American participants, mean body mass index (BMI)
was 24.01 kg/m2 (SD = 4.31); for Caucasian participants, mean BMI
was 22.31 kg/m2 (SD = 2.83). Highest parental education was used
as a proxy for socioeconomic status. On average, the highest education attained by parents of the African American women was
16.00 years (SD = 2.94), and for Caucasian women, the mean was
16.38 years (SD = 2.54). Of note, age, t(83) = −2.65, p = .010, and
BMI, t(97) = −3.03, p = .003, were significantly different across the
groups, while highest parental education was not, t(224) = 1.00,
p = .318. We ran analyses both controlling for and without controlling for BMI and age (given that these variables differed significantly
across the groups), with similar patterns of significance emerging
whether or not these covariates were included. As such, results
without either covariate are presented for the sake of parsimony,
with the one analysis where the pattern of significance changed
(from marginally significant to significant) noted in the Results.
Procedures
This study was reviewed and approved by the university’s Institutional Review Board. At two time points, separated by about
5 months, participants completed the same set of questionnaires
as part of a study presented to them as a longitudinal investigation of personality and eating patterns. Only African American and
Caucasian women were invited to participate. Efforts were made
to oversample African American women, given research interests in this population, and recruitment occurred both through
introductory psychology courses and through campuswide recruitment strategies (e.g., flyers, email distribution lists that targeted
racially/ethnically diverse students). The time points were separated by 5 months for pragmatic reasons, so that both T1 data
collection (which occurred in the fall semester) and T2 data collection (which occurred in the spring semester) could occur in an
academic year, so as to achieve a good retention rate. Because data
collection occurred within a single academic year, contacting participants for T2 participation simply involved contacting them via
the email addresses and phone numbers they provided at T1. Of
note, other research has used time periods of less than 1 year in
predicting change in aspects of weight/shape concern among adolescent and undergraduate females (e.g., Presnell, Bearman, & Stice,
2004 – 9 months; Striegel-Moore, Silberstein, Frensch, & Rodin,
1989 – 8 months).
Questionnaires were presented in a fixed, random order and
were administered to groups of participants (typically from 5
to 25 per group) after obtaining written consent. Questionnaire
completion took 45 min to 1 h, and participants received course
credit or remuneration (e.g., $10 gift certificate to a local shopping
mall) for their involvement. Of the T1 participants, significantly
more Caucasian women (156 of 179; 87.2%) than African American women (70 of 97; 72.2%) completed T2, 2 (1, 276) = 9.52,
p = .002. Completers were compared to noncompleters both in the
full sample and within racial group using t-tests; these groups were
not significantly different from each other on body surveillance or
weight/shape concern at T1. Thus, the completers appear to be representative of the participants who began the study on the study
variables, minimizing attrition concerns.
Measures
Demographics. Demographic data for age, parents’ highest levels of education attained, and race/ethnicity were collected via a set
of questions created for this study.
Body surveillance. Body surveillance was measured at both
time points with the Body Surveillance subscale of the Objectified Body Consciousness Scale (OBCS; McKinley & Hyde, 1996).
This subscale consists of eight items that are rated on an 7-point
scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) and
averaged to create a subscale score, with higher scores indicating higher levels of surveillance or habitual body monitoring and
thinking of one’s body in terms of how it looks rather than how
one feels. Construct validity is demonstrated by high correlations
with public self-consciousness (r = .73) and nonsignificant relations
with private self-consciousness (McKinley & Hyde, 1996). McKinley
and Hyde (1996) reported a coefficient alpha of .89 in a sample of
student and nonstudent women, and in the current study, alpha
was .74/.79 for African American women and .89/.88 for Caucasian
women at T1 and T2, respectively. No known formal test of this
subscale’s psychometric properties has been conducted using an
African American sample; however, research has indicated that this
subscale exhibited adequate internal consistency (alpha of .70) and
moderate positive correlations with self-objectification and body
shame for African American women (similar correlational patterns
have been observed for Caucasian women; Buchanan et al., 2008).
Weight/shape concern. Weight/shape concern was assessed at
both time points via the 12 items that comprise the Weight Concern
and Shape Concern subscales of the Eating Disorder ExaminationQuestionnaire (EDE-Q; Fairburn & Beglin, 1994), a measure that
was derived from the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE) interview (Fairburn & Cooper, 1993). These items are rated on a 7-point
scale ranging from 0 to 6, with items either rated on a no days to
everyday or not at all to markedly scale; items were averaged to
create a subscale score. The EDE-Q assesses disordered eating psychopathology over the past four weeks, and these two subscales
focus on weight and shape dissatisfaction and the degree to which
one’s self-worth and acceptance of oneself are defined by weight
or shape (Ross & Wade, 2004). Weight/shape concern was operationalized by combining the Weight Concern and Shape Concern
subscales so as to capture multiple dimensions of the construct
of body dissatisfaction, and because previous work has indicated
that these two subscales generally load onto one underlying factor
(Peterson et al., 2007). The EDE-Q is one of the most commonly used
measures of disordered eating attitudes and behaviors in clinical
and community populations (Anderson & Williamson, 2002) and
its subscales demonstrate internal consistency (alphas of .78–.93;
Luce & Crowther, 1999) and convergent validity (Fairburn & Beglin,
1994; Grilo, Masheb, & Wilson, 2001) among samples of college
women and community and patient groups. Bardone-Cone and
Boyd (2007) reported internal consistency (.83–.91) and 5-month
temporal stability (.80–.81) of the EDE-Q Weight Concern and
Shape Concern subscales across samples of both African American
and Caucasian college women. Further, in the current sample, these
subscales show similar correlations with bulimic symptomatology and dietary restraint for both African American and Caucasian
women. In this sample, alpha was .91/.91 for African American
women and .94/.94 for Caucasian women at T1 and T2, respectively.
BMI. Participants reported on their current weight and height
at T1, and we used this information to compute BMI by dividing weight in kilograms by height in meters squared. This index
controls for weight variations due to height, yielding a measure
of relative weight. There is evidence that individuals are generally accurate with their self-reported weights (Shapiro & Anderson,
2003).
E.E. Fitzsimmons, A.M. Bardone-Cone / Body Image 8 (2011) 216–223
Analytic Strategy
In this study, we used a similar analytic approach (i.e., mediation
models) to that utilized by Burns et al. (2008) in their examination of upward spirals of positive emotion and broad-minded
coping. For example, for our first hypothesis, examining whether
initial weight/shape concern predicted subsequent weight/shape
concern through ongoing experiences of body surveillance: T1
weight/shape concern was entered as the independent variable,
averaged T1–T2 body surveillance was the mediator, and T2
weight/shape concern was the dependent variable. That is, we estimated the path in the regression of the mediator (i.e., averaged
T1–T2 body surveillance) onto T1 weight/shape concern (i.e., the a
path) and the path in the regression of T2 weight/shape concern
onto averaged T1–T2 body surveillance controlling for T1 levels
of weight/shape concern (i.e., the b path). The ab product term
(i.e., point estimate) then provides an estimate of the meditational
effect of T1 weight/shape concern on T2 weight/shape concern
through averaged body surveillance; the significance test of this
point estimate determines whether this value is significantly different from zero. We then examined whether such point estimates
differed across the groups by subtracting them and testing whether
the difference estimate was significantly different from zero. As in
Burns et al. (2008), because we were interested in whether ongoing
experiences of body surveillance account for changes over time in
weight/shape concern, we examined whether the relation between
T1 and T2 weight/shape concern was mediated by the T1–T2 mean
of body surveillance (rather than the T1 version of this variable).
As suggested by Burns et al. (2008), an alternative approach
would be to use the T1 version of the mediator (as opposed to
the averaged T1–T2 version) to predict changes from T1 to T2 in
the dependent variable. Results using this approach were generally consistent but much less strong than those using the averaged
T1–T2 mediator. As purported by Burns et al. (2008), we believe this
is to be expected given that the T1 version of the mediator captures
processes that occur at T1 and before, while the averaged T1–T2
mediator captures processing occurring between T1 and T2 (which
we are more interested in). Because we were interested in ongoing
experiences of the mediator, the averaged T1–T2 variable was most
appropriate.
Mplus Version 5.21 (Muthén & Muthén, 2007) was used to run
these analyses. Further, because the assumption of normality of
the sampling distribution of these indirect effects was questionable
given our small sample sizes (i.e., this sampling distribution is normal only in very large samples, and in general, indirect effects are
rarely normal), we used the bootstrapping method, which is recommended when assumptions may not be met (Preacher & Hayes,
2008). Bootstrapping (using 5000 resamples) was used to obtain
estimates of the indirect effects and to test their significance via
confidence intervals. Additionally, multiple group modeling was
utilized to examine whether the hypothesized models fit differentially for African American and Caucasian college women.
Results
Descriptive Statistics
Table 1 displays means for and correlations between the study
variables for both groups. Results indicated that Caucasian women
experienced similar levels of T1 body surveillance as the African
American women, t(224) = 0.98, p = .329. As expected, they differed
in T1 weight/shape concern, t(224) = 3.33, p = .001. (When examining these constructs at T2, there were group differences both in
weight/shape concern, t(224) = 2.55, p = .011, and in body surveillance, t(224) = 2.50, p = .013.) Furthermore, repeated measures
219
analyses of variance (ANOVAs) indicated that mean body surveillance significantly differed from T1 to T2 for the African American
women, F(1, 69) = 4.96, p = .029, but not for the Caucasian women,
F(1, 155) = 0.59, p = .443. Mean weight/shape concern did not significantly differ from T1 to T2 for either group (African American
women: F(1, 69) = 0.03, p = .861; Caucasian women: F(1, 155) = 3.18,
p = .076). For both groups, the T1 correlations between body surveillance and weight/shape concern were strong (Caucasian women:
r = .66, p < .001; African American women: r = .53, p < .001), with a
Fisher r-to-z transformation indicating that this concurrent relation
was equally strong across the groups, z = 1.32, p = .187.
Do Body Surveillance and Weight/Shape Concern
Reciprocally Influence One Another?
Our first hypothesis was that T1 weight/shape concern would
predict T2 weight/shape concern, at least partly as a function of
predicting intermediary levels of body surveillance, and similarly,
our second hypothesis was that T1 body surveillance would predict
T2 body surveillance, partly as a function of predicting intermediary
levels of weight/shape concern. It was predicted that these mediation models would hold for Caucasian women; the tests of these
models in African American women were exploratory.
In terms of the first hypothesis, results indicated that averaged body surveillance significantly partially mediated the relation
between T1 weight/shape concern and T2 weight/shape concern
for both the Caucasian and African American women (see Table 2).
The model and standardized path estimates are shown in Fig. 1.
Of note, because the model was just identified (fully saturated),
there were zero degrees of freedom and a perfect fit; thus, meaningful fit indices could not be calculated. The indirect effect of T1
weight/shape concern on T2 weight/shape concern through averaged body surveillance was marginally significantly greater among
the Caucasian women (see Table 2), although the group difference became significant (point estimate = 0.134, SE = 0.062, p = .029,
bootstrapping 95% confidence interval = 0.015–0.259) when controlling for BMI. We note that the remaining direct effect from T1
weight/shape concern to T2 weight/shape concern was quite strong
for both groups; this is not surprising given that one would expect
a fair amount of temporal stability in this construct.
In terms of the second hypothesis, results indicated that averaged weight/shape concern significantly partially mediated the
relation between T1 body surveillance and T2 body surveillance for
the Caucasian women but not for the African American women (see
Table 2). Further, results indicated that the size of this indirect effect
was significantly different across groups (with the effect being
larger for the Caucasian women). The model and standardized path
estimates are shown in Fig. 2. Again, because the model was just
identified (fully saturated), there were zero degrees of freedom and
a perfect fit. We again note that the strength of the remaining direct
effect from T1 body surveillance to T2 body surveillance was quite
strong for both groups; again, this was not surprising given that
one would expect this construct to be at least somewhat stable
over time.
Taken together, these findings indicate that for the Caucasian women, body surveillance predicts itself partly through
weight/shape concern and that weight/shape concern predicts
itself partly through body surveillance. Thus, these two constructs
appear to reciprocally influence one another in college women
of this racial/ethnic group. In the case of the African American
college women, the same downward spirals are not apparent;
weight/shape concern predicts itself partly through body surveillance but body surveillance does not appear to predict itself through
weight/shape concern.
220
E.E. Fitzsimmons, A.M. Bardone-Cone / Body Image 8 (2011) 216–223
Table 1
Correlations among and means and standard deviations of the measured variables for both the Caucasian and African American women.
1
1. Body surveillance T1
2
3
.78***
–
4
.53***
.33**
.42***
.53***
.36**
.84***
.56***
2. Body surveillance T2
.72***
3. Weight/shape concern T1
.66***
.58***
4. Weight/shape concern T2
.60***
.67***
.82***
5. BMI T1
.04
.02
.23**
–
5
.53***
–
C: M = 4.88, SD = 1.16
AA: M = 4.72, SD = 1.02
C: M = 4.93, SD = 1.10
AA: M = 4.54, SD = 1.06
C: M = 2.92, SD = 1.48
AA: M = 2.21, SD = 1.48
C: M = 2.79, SD = 1.55
AA: M = 2.23, SD = 1.49
C: M = 22.31, SD = 2.83
AA: M = 24.01, SD = 4.31
.60***
–
.28***
–
Note: C = Caucasians. AA = African Americans. Variables are continuous, with higher values reflecting higher levels of the construct. Correlations for the African American
women are above the diagonal, and correlations for the Caucasian women are below the diagonal.
**
p < .01.
***
p < .001.
Table 2
Mediation of the effect of T1 weight/shape concern on T2 weight/shape concern through averaged body surveillance (Model 1) and of T1 body surveillance on T2 body
surveillance through averaged weight/shape concern (Model 2).
Point estimate
SE
p
Bootstrapping percentile 95% CI
Lower
Upper
Model 1: based on Hypothesis 1
Indirect effects
C: ab (through averaged body surveillance)
AA: ab (through averaged body surveillance)
0.190
0.088
0.048
0.035
.000
.013
0.099
0.030
0.285
0.172
Contrasts
ab (through averaged body surveillance): C v. AA
0.102
0.060
.089
−0.018
0.221
Model 2: based on Hypothesis 2
Indirect effects
C: ab (through averaged weight/shape concern)
AA: ab (through averaged weight/shape concern)
0.210
0.057
0.046
0.057
.000
.322
0.127
−0.048
0.309
0.178
Contrasts
ab (through averaged weight/shape concern): C v. AA
0.153
0.074
.038
0.005
0.298
Note: C = Caucasians. AA = African Americans. CI = confidence interval. Model 1 (based on Hypothesis 1) involves averaged body surveillance as a mediator of the relation
between T1 weight/shape concern and T2 weight/shape concern. Model 2 (based on Hypothesis 2) involves averaged weight/shape concern as a mediator of the relation
between T1 body surveillance and T2 body surveillance. Parameters based on 5000 bootstrap samples.
Discussion
Why do body surveillance and weight/shape concern not
reciprocally influence each other in this sample of African American women? Specifically, why was no support found for initial
body surveillance spurring subsequent body surveillance via
weight/shape concern? This suggests that for African American college women, inspecting their bodies is not maintained or increased
because of resultant weight/shape concern. Instead, when these
women survey their bodies, they may be less negatively affected
by what they see given that African American women typically
define attractiveness in a more comprehensive and multifaceted
way than Caucasian women (Breitkopf et al., 2007). In contrast to
Caucasian women who rely heavily on thinness in their definitions
The present study sought to examine the potential reciprocal
relations between body surveillance and weight/shape concern
in African American and Caucasian college women. Results indicated that downward spirals of body surveillance and weight/shape
concern were apparent for the Caucasian but not African American women. These findings lend support to the notion that for
African American women, these constructs may not necessarily
go hand-in-hand; however, there was evidence that body surveillance helped account for change in weight/shape concern for this
group.
C: .69***/
AA: .52***a
X
T1 Weight/Shape
Concern
M
Averaged Body
Surveillance
C: .64***/AA: .76***
C: .26***/
AA: .18**
Y
T2 Weight/Shape
Concern
Fig. 1. Model 1 (based on Hypothesis 1). C = Caucasians. AA = African Americans. Path coefficients are standardized. ***p < .001. **p < .01. a Path coefficients that differ significantly across the groups at the p < .05 level.
E.E. Fitzsimmons, A.M. Bardone-Cone / Body Image 8 (2011) 216–223
221
M
C: .69***/
AA: .55***
X
Averaged
Weight/Shape
Concern
C: .50***/AA: .73***a
T1 Body
Surveillance
C: .33***/
AA: .10a
Y
T2 Body
Surveillance
Fig. 2. Model 2 (based on Hypothesis 2). C = Caucasians. AA = African Americans. Path coefficients are standardized. ***p < .001.a Path coefficients that differ significantly across
the groups at the p < .05 level.
of attractiveness (Hesse-Biber, 1996), African American women
tend to make “what [they’ve] got work for [them]” (Parker et al.,
1995, p. 108) and to have a broad and flexible definition of beauty.
Thus, to the extent that body surveillance lets them identify what
they have to “work” with, while it may generate further surveillance, this is less likely due to weight/shape concern.
Results did indicate that body surveillance helped explain
the relation between initial and subsequent weight/shape concern for African American college women though, suggesting
that once an African American women is dissatisfied/concerned
with her body and turns to body surveillance, then mismatches
identified between herself and ideals may generate more dissatisfaction/concern. This indirect effect was apparent for the Caucasian
women as well. This relation may be operating for both groups
because once a woman is concerned with her body (i.e., has a negative body schema), the results of subsequent body surveillance are
likely to confirm the individual’s negative outlook on her body and
prompt further weight/shape concern. Indeed, research has indicated that once a negative body schema has been formed, it serves
to maintain body image disturbance since the schema determines
what the individual notices, attends to, and remembers about experiences with their bodies (Padesky, 1994). Even if body surveillance
were to result in the individual finding some aspects of her body
that contradict her negative body schema, individuals who are
already concerned with their weight/shape will likely not notice,
distort, or discount such contradictory evidence (Kearney-Cooke &
Striegel-Moore, 1997).
Overall, given African American women’s multifaceted definitions of attractiveness and more flexible standards of beauty, it
makes conceptual sense that body surveillance and weight/shape
concern would not necessarily reciprocally influence one other for
this group; this supposition was confirmed by the results of the
current study. In contrast, downward spirals of body surveillance
and weight/shape concern were apparent for the Caucasian women
in this study, as evidence of partial mediation suggests that these
constructs may help account for increasing levels of one another
over time. These results provide support for the inter-related nature
of body surveillance and weight/shape concern for this group.
Previous research has indicated that among Caucasian samples,
body surveillance may predict weight/shape concern (e.g., Knauss
et al., 2008; Muehlenkamp et al., 2005). To our knowledge, this
is the first study to show that weight/shape concern may lead to
increased levels of body surveillance as well, and that these constructs have a reciprocal influence upon one another. Thus, it seems
that Caucasian individuals who fall into such downward spirals
may not only experience increased body surveillance/weight/shape
concern, but may also set themselves on a trajectory to keep experiencing such body surveillance/weight/shape concern.
The current study has several strengths, including the novel
focus on the potential reciprocal relations (i.e., downward spirals)
between body surveillance and weight/shape concern. Another
strength of the study is the focus on the consequences of body
surveillance/self-objectification for African American women. As
aforementioned, this is one of only a handful of studies to examine these constructs among this group. Also, our analytic strategy
was novel (modeled from Burns et al., 2008) and provided us with
a way to examine potential downward spirals between the study
constructs utilizing two waves of data.
Some limitations of the present study include the relatively
small sample size, the fixed order of questionnaire presentation
(which may have resulted in more participant fatigue during later
questionnaires), the relatively short follow-up period, and generalizability. We note that the small sample size (particularly of African
American women) may have made it difficult to detect significant
path coefficients and indirect effects that were small. Fritz and
MacKinnon (2007) found that in order to detect path coefficients of
medium size (i.e., values of .39), a sample size of at least 71 is needed
in order to achieve .8 power when using bias-corrected bootstrap
methodology (i.e., the approach utilized in the current study). However, in order to detect path coefficients that are smaller (i.e., set to
values of .26), Fritz and MacKinnon (2007) found that at least 148
individuals would be needed to achieve the same level of power.
Generalizing from these results, the current sample size was likely
sufficient to detect path coefficients and indirect effects of medium
size; however, for the African American women, it may have been
difficult to detect real effects that were small in magnitude. Yet, the
only path coefficient that was not significant for the African American women was of a magnitude of .10, which would potentially not
be significant even with a much larger sample size. Although the
use of a college sample may be appropriate, especially given the
high prevalence of weight/shape concern among this group (e.g.,
Silberstein, Striegel-Moore, Timko, & Rodin, 1988), the generalizability of these findings to other groups that differ in developmental
stage (e.g., adolescents, middle-age women), socio-economic status, etc. is unclear.
Future research should examine whether certain factors moderate whether these reciprocal relations occur. For instance,
perfectionism may serve as a moderator, whereby highly perfectionistic individuals (whose striving for the “perfect” body will
be unattainable; Striegel-Moore, McAvay, & Rodin, 1986) may be
more susceptible to downward spirals of body surveillance and
weight/shape concern than those low in perfectionism. Related
specifically to African American women, moderators such as degree
of identification with African American culture and acculturation
may indicate that a subsample is vulnerable to downward spirals of body surveillance and weight/shape concern, or indicate for
whom body surveillance affecting change in weight/shape concern
is most likely; looked at differently, these potential moderators may
indicate who is protected (e.g., women who identify strongly with
African American culture). Indeed, level of acculturation may play
222
E.E. Fitzsimmons, A.M. Bardone-Cone / Body Image 8 (2011) 216–223
a large role in determining how an African American woman feels
about and responds to her body (Beech et al., 2004; Henrickson,
Crowther, & Harrington, 2010; Hesse-Biber et al., 2010). It will
also be important to determine whether other protective factors
exist, such as self-efficacy, low thin-ideal internalization or holding
a broad definition of beauty (Wood-Barcalow, Tylka, & AugustusHorvath, 2010), which may prevent or disrupt downward spirals.
Gapinski, Brownell, and LaFrance (2003) found that women who
were high on self-objectification generally tended to be less likely
to feel self-efficacious, capable, and purposeful, suggesting that
fostering self-efficacy may disrupt negative effects of body surveillance. Different sampling strategies are also recommended, in
particular, examining these relations among women at historically
Black colleges, since African American participants in the current study were students at a predominantly Caucasian university
(about 84% Caucasian and 6% African American) and because group
norms and sociocultural factors play an important role in defining
beauty and attractiveness. In the future, research should also assess
other factors that may be relevant in terms of African American
women’s body image (e.g., skin tone, hair texture; Buchanan et al.,
2008); it would be interesting to investigate whether including
such factors in body dissatisfaction definitions (rather than focusing solely on weight and shape concerns) sheds additional light on
the possibility of downward spirals between body surveillance and
aspects of body dissatisfaction for this group. Lastly, future research
may wish to examine other self-objectification-related constructs
that might work together in a downward spiral-type fashion, such
as body shame and internalization of the thin ideal.
As evidenced by the results of this study, at least for Caucasian
women, it seems that body surveillance accounts for increases in
weight/shape concern and that weight/shape concern accounts for
increases in body surveillance. This has significant clinical implications. For example, clinicians would be wise to teach women
strategies for buffering the deleterious effects of body surveillance and weight/shape concern (e.g., coping skills) or ways of
“uncoupling” body surveillance and weight/shape concern, for
example, by defining attractiveness in a more comprehensive manner. Specifically, even if a woman engages in body surveillance, it
is unlikely that such surveillance would lead to significant feelings
of weight/shape concern if she holds a broad and flexible definition
of attractiveness that incorporates more than just physical appearance. In the case of African American women (for whom reciprocal
relations between body surveillance and weight/shape concern do
not seem to exist), already-existing protective factors, such as a
more flexible and multi-faceted definition of beauty, should be
bolstered.
In conclusion, the results reported here provide prospective evidence that at least for Caucasian women, body surveillance and
weight/shape concern may have effects beyond those that occur
in the present moment. That is, experiences of body surveillance
not only lead to increased weight/shape concern for this group,
but weight/shape concern also predicts increased levels of body
surveillance. In contrast, the same downward spirals were not
apparent for the African American women, although there was evidence that body surveillance helped account for change in their
weight/shape concern.
References
Akan, G. E., & Grilo, C. M. (1995). Sociocultural influence in eating attitudes and
behaviors, body image, and psychological functioning: A comparison of AfricanAmerican, Asian-American, and Caucasian college women. International Journal
of Eating Disorders, 18, 181–187.
Altabe, M. (1998). Ethnicity and body image: Quantitative and qualitative analysis.
International Journal of Eating Disorders, 23, 153–159.
Anderson, D. A., & Williamson, D. A. (2002). Outcome measurement in eating disorders. In W. W. IsHak, T. Burt & L. I. Sederer (Eds.), Outcome measurement in
psychiatry: A critical review (pp. 289–301). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
Bardone-Cone, A. M., & Boyd, C. A. (2007). Psychometric properties of eating disorder
instruments in Black and White young women: Internal consistency, temporal
stability, and validity. Psychological Assessment, 19, 356–362.
Barry, D. T., & Grilo, C. M. (2002). Eating and body image disturbances in adolescent
psychiatric inpatients: Gender and ethnicity patterns. International Journal of
Eating Disorders, 32, 335–343.
Bartky, S. L. (1990). Femininity and domination: Studies in the phenomenology of
oppression. New York: Routledge.
Baugh, E., Mullis, R., Mullis, A., Hicks, M., & Peterson, G. (2010). Ethnic identity and
body image among Black and White college females. Journal of American College
Health, 59, 105–109.
Beech, B. M., Kumanyika, S. K., Baranowski, T., Davis, M., Robinson, T. N., Sherwood,
N. E., et al. (2004). Parental cultural perspectives in relation to weight-related
behaviors and concerns of African-American girls. Obesity Research, 12, 7S–19S.
Breitkopf, C. R., Littleton, H., & Berenson, A. (2007). Body image: A study in a tri-ethnic
sample of low income women. Sex Roles, 56, 373–380.
Buchanan, T. S., Fischer, A. R., Tokar, D. M., & Yoder, J. D. (2008). Testing a culturespecific extension of objectification theory regarding African American women’s
body image. The Counseling Psychologist, 36, 697–718.
Burns, A. B., Brown, J. S., Sachs-Ericsson, N., Plant, E. A., Curtis, J. T., Fredrickson,
B. L., et al. (2008). Upward spirals of positive emotion and coping: Replication,
extension, and initial exploration of neurochemical substrates. Personality and
Individual Differences, 44, 360–370.
DeLeel, M. L., Hughes, T. L., Miller, J. A., Hipwell, A., & Theodore, L. A. (2009). Prevalence of eating disturbance and body image dissatisfaction in young girls: An
examination of the variance across racial and socioeconomic groups. Psychology
in the Schools, 46, 767–775.
Fairburn, C. G., & Beglin, S. J. (1994). Assessment of eating disorders: Interview or
self-report questionnaire? International Journal of Eating Disorders, 16, 363–370.
Fairburn, C. G., & Cooper, Z. (1993). The eating disorder examination. In C. G. Fairburn
& G. T. Wilson (Eds.), Binge eating: Nature assessment and treatment (12th ed., pp.
317–360). New York: Guilford Press.
Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 21, 173–206.
Fritz, M. S., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2007). Required sample size to detect the mediated
effect. Psychological Science, 18, 233–239.
Gapinski, K. D., Brownell, K. D., & LaFrance, M. (2003). Body objectification and “fat
talk”: Effects on emotion, motivation, and cognitive performance. Sex Roles, 48,
377–388.
Gilbert, S., & Thompson, J. K. (1996). Feminist explanations of the development of eating disorders: Common themes, research findings, and methodological issues.
Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 3, 183–202.
Gordon, K. H., Castro, Y., Sitnikov, L., & Holm-Denoma, J. M. (2010). Cultural body
shape ideals and eating disorder symptoms among White Latina, and Black
college women. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16, 135–143.
Grabe, S., & Hyde, J. S. (2006). Ethnicity and body dissatisfaction among women in
the United States: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 622–640.
Grilo, C. M., Masheb, R. M., & Wilson, G. T. (2001). A comparison of different methods for assessing the features of eating disorders in patients with binge eating
disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69, 317–322.
Harrison, K., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2003). Women’s sports media, self-objectification,
and mental health in Black and White adolescent females. Journal of Communication, 53, 216–232.
Hebl, M. R, King, E. B., & Lin, J. (2004). The swimsuit becomes us all: Ethnicity, gender, and vulnerability to self-objectification. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 30, 1322–1331.
Henrickson, H. C., Crowther, J. H., & Harrington, E. F. (2010). Ethnic identity and
maladaptive eating: Expectancies about eating and thinness in African American
women. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16, 87–93.
Hesse-Biber, S. J. (1996). Am I thin enough yet?: The cult of thinness and the commercialization of identity. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hesse-Biber, S., Livingstone, S., Ramirez, D., Barko, E. B., & Johnson, A. L. (2010).
Racial identity and body image among Black female college students attending
predominately White colleges. Sex Roles, 63, 697–711.
Kearney-Cooke, A., & Striegel-Moore, R. (1997). The etiology and treatment of body
image disturbance. In D. M. Garner & P. E. Garfinkel (Eds.), Handbook of treatment
for eating disorders (2nd ed., pp. 295–306). New York: Guilford.
Knauss, C., Paxton, S. J., & Alsaker, F. D. (2008). Body dissatisfaction in adolescent
boys and girls: Objectified body consciousness, internalization of the media body
ideal and perceived pressure from media. Sex Roles, 59, 633–643.
Luce, K. H., & Crowther, J. H. (1999). The reliability of the Eating Disorder
Examination—Self-report Questionnaire Version (EDE-Q). International Journal
of Eating Disorders, 25, 349–351.
McKinley, N. M. (1998). Gender differences in undergraduates’ body esteem: The
mediating effect of objectified body consciousness and actual/ideal weight discrepancy. Sex Roles, 39, 113–123.
McKinley, N. M. (2004). Resisting body dissatisfaction: Fat women who endorse fat
acceptance. Body Image, 1, 213–219.
McKinley, N. M., & Hyde, J. S. (1996). The Objectified Body Consciousness Scale:
Development and validation. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 181–215.
Miner-Rubino, K., Twenge, J. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2002). Trait self-objectification
in women: Affective and personality correlates. Journal of Research in Personality,
36, 147–172.
E.E. Fitzsimmons, A.M. Bardone-Cone / Body Image 8 (2011) 216–223
Mitchell, K. S., & Mazzeo, S. E. (2009). Evaluation of a structural model of objectification theory and eating disorder symptomatology among European American
and African American undergraduate women. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
33, 384–395.
Moradi, B. (2010). Addressing gender and cultural diversity in body image: Objectification theory as a framework for integrating theories and grounding research.
Sex Roles, 63, 138–148.
Moradi, B. (2011). Objectification theory: Areas of promise and refinement. Counseling Psychologist, 39, 153–163.
Moradi, B., & Huang, Y. (2008). Objectification theory and psychology of women:
A decade of advances and future directions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32,
377–398.
Muehlenkamp, J. J., Swanson, J. D., & Brausch, A. M. (2005). Self-objectification, risk
taking, and self-harm in college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29,
24–32.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus user’s guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles:
Muthén & Muthén.
Padesky, C. A. (1994). Schema change processes in cognitive therapy. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy: An International Journal of Theory and Practice, 1,
267–278.
Parker, S., Nichter, M., Nichter, M., Vuckovic, N., Sims, C., & Ritenbaugh, C. (1995).
Body image and weight concerns among African American and White adolescent
females: Differences which make a difference. Human Organization, 54, 103–114.
Peterson, C. B., Crosby, R. D., Wonderlich, S. A., Joiner, T., Crow, S. J., Mitchell, J.
E., et al. (2007). Psychometric properties of the Eating Disorder ExaminationQuestionnaire: Factor structure and internal consistency. International Journal
of Eating Disorders, 40, 386–389.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for
assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior
Research Methods, 40, 879–891.
Presnell, K., Bearman, S. K., & Stice, E. (2004). Risk factors for body dissatisfaction
in adolescent boys and girls: A prospective study. International Journal of Eating
Disorders, 36, 389–401.
Roberts, A., Cash, T. F., Feingold, A., & Johnson, B. T. (2006). Are Black-White differences in females’ body dissatisfaction decreasing? A meta-analytic review.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 74, 1121–1131.
Rodin, J., Silberstein, L., & Striegel-Moore, R. (1984). Women and weight: A normative
discontent. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 32, 267–307.
223
Ross, M., & Wade, T. D. (2004). Shape and weight concern and self-esteem as mediators of externalized self-perception, dietary restraint and uncontrolled eating.
European Eating Disorders Review, 12, 129–136.
Shapiro, J. R., & Anderson, D. A. (2003). The effects of restraint, gender, and body
mass index on accuracy of self-reported weight. International Journal of Eating
Disorders, 34, 177–180.
Shaw, H., Ramirez, L., Trost, A., Randall, P., & Stice, E. (2004). Body image and eating
disturbances across ethnic groups: More similarities than differences. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 18, 12–18.
Silberstein, L. R., Striegel-Moore, R. H., Timko, C., & Rodin, J. (1988). Behavioral and
psychological implications of body dissatisfaction: Do men and women differ?
Sex Roles, 19, 219–232.
Spitzack, C. (1990). Confessing excess: Women and the politics of body reduction.
Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Stice, E. (1994). Review of the evidence for a sociocultural model of bulimia nervosa
and an exploration of the mechanisms of action. Clinical Psychology Review, 14,
633–661.
Story, M., French, S. A., & Resnick, M. D. (1995). Ethnic/racial and socioeconomic
differences in dieting behaviors and body image perceptions in adolescents.
International Journal of Eating Disorders, 18, 173–179.
Striegel-Moore, R. H., McAvay, G., & Rodin, J. (1986). Psychological and behavioral
correlates of feeling fat in women. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 5,
935–947.
Striegel-Moore, R. H., Silberstein, L. R., Frensch, P., & Rodin, J. (1989). Prospective
study of disordered eating among college students. International Journal of Eating
Disorders, 8, 499–509.
Thompson, J. K., & Stice, E. (2001). Thin-ideal internalization: Mounting evidence
for a new risk factor for body-image disturbance and eating pathology. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 181–183.
Tiggemann, M., & Lynch, J. E. (2001). Body image across the life span in
adult women: The role of self-objectification. Developmental Psychology, 37,
243–253.
Wildes, J. E., Emery, R. E., & Simons, A. D. (2001). The roles of ethnicity and culture in
the development of eating disturbance and body dissatisfaction: A meta-analytic
review. Clinical Psychology Review, 21, 521–551.
Wood-Barcalow, N. L., Tylka, T. L., & Augustus-Horvath, C. L. (2010). “But I like my
body”: Positive body image characteristics and a holistic model for young-adult
women. Body Image, 7, 106–116.