Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Interpersonal Sexual Objectification Scale

Abstract

This study reports on the development and psychometric evaluation of the Interpersonal Sexual Objectification Scale (ISOS). Data from 576 college women were collected in three studies. Exploratory factor analysis uncovered two factors: Body Evaluation and Unwanted Explicit Sexual Advances; confirmatory factor analysis supported this factor structure. ISOS scores were internally consistent and stable over a 3-week period. Supporting its construct validity, ISOS scores were (a) strongly related to sexist degradation; (b) slightly to moderately related to other sexist events, self-objectification (i.e., body surveillance and internalization of the thin-ideal), and body shame; and (c) unrelated to socially desirable responding. The relationship between ISOS scores and body shame was fully mediated by self-objectification, providing additional evidence for its construct validity. Furthermore, the ISOS garnered incremental validity, as it predicted self-objectification above and beyond the variance accounted for by sexist events.

Beauty Is in the Eye of the Beer Holder: An Initial Investigation of the Effects of Alcohol, Attractiveness, Warmth, and Competence on the Objectifying Gaze in Men

“…Although a large body of research has established women's frequent experiences of objectifying gazes (e.g., Kozee et al 2007), little work has examined the origins of these behaviors. The current study examines a situational variable-alcohol consumption-to determine whether intoxication increases objectifying gazes as well as interacts with perceived attractiveness, warmth, and competence to influence objectifying gazes directed at female targets.…”

“…Furthermore, most studies examining objectification perpetration have focused on very attractive women (e.g., swimsuit models; Bernard et al 2012;Loughnan et al 2010;Vaes et al 2011;celebrities;Heflick and Goldenberg 2009). As a result, less is known about when and why people objectify women who are less attractive, even though average and less attractive women self-report objectification (Kozee et al 2007;Swim et al 2001). Additionally, we sought to extend previous research revealing that objectification causes dehumanization by examining whether women who appear less warm or less competent are objectified more than women who appear more warm or more competent.…”

“…If men who are under the influence of alcohol pay less attention to the humanizing attributes of women (e.g., through decreased focus on facial cues), they may be less able to gauge women's sexual interests accurately (Farris et al 2008). Furthermore, for women who are targets of objectification, these experiences may potentially act as a precursor to behavioral confirmation in which women begin to self-objectify (Kozee et al 2007), leading to safety concerns (Fairchild and Rudman 2008), negative affect, reduced flow, increased body monitoring, and shame (Calogero et al 2011;Noll and Fredrickson 1998;Tiggemann and Williams 2012). Within clinical settings, potential objectification resulting from myopia should be considered and addressed.…”

“…Despite theorizing about the importance of the objectifying gaze (Fredrickson and Roberts 1997), self-reports from women experiencing the gaze (Kozee et al 2007), and self-reports of men perpetrating the gaze (Gervais et al 2014), surprisingly little research has examined which factors affect this objectionable behavior. The only known published studies on the objectifying gaze using behavioral measures to date suggest that as focus on appearance increases, the objectifying gaze also increases (Gervais et al 2013).…”

“…The objectifying gaze-staring at people's bodies and body parts-is a prevalent and damaging manifestation of objectification that is often directed at women from men (Archer et al 1983;Fredrickson and Roberts 1997;Kaschak 1992;Kozee et al 2007;Moradi and Huang 2008;Mulvey 1975). Objectifying gazes indicate to women they are being reduced to their body parts for the pleasure of the viewer, resulting in myriad adverse outcomes (Fredrickson and Roberts 1997).…”