Do Appearance Focused Cognitive Distortions Moderate the Relationship between Social Comparisons to Peers and Media Images and Body Image Disturbance?

Abstract

Research suggests that appearance focused social comparisons are associated with body image disturbances. This study utilized ecological momentary assessment to examine associations between appearance focused social comparisons to media images and peers and body image disturbance and affect. Appearance focused cognitive distortions were examined as a moderator. Ninety-three undergraduate women from a large public Midwestern university in the United States completed questionnaires assessing the nature, frequency, and consequences of appearance focused social comparisons. Compared to no comparison, media comparisons were associated with greater body checking, negative affect, and guilt; peer comparisons were associated with greater body checking and guilt. Cognitive distortions moderated the relationship between appearance focused social comparisons and body checking. Specifically, the relationship between peer comparisons and body checking was strengthened at higher levels of appearance focused cognitive distortions. When only upward comparisons were considered, the relationships between both media and peer comparisons and body checking were strengthened at higher levels of appearance focused cognitive distortions. These results have implications for the treatment of body dissatisfaction.

Social comparisons on social media: The impact of Facebook on young women's body image concerns and mood

“…Some research examining the impact of appearance comparisons to these different target groups has shown that comparisons to peers and models can lead to different outcomes in regard to women's body image concerns, perhaps because the appearance of peers is seen to be more personally attainable than the appearance of models or celebrities due to the similar resources and lifestyle that peers often have to oneself. However, the findings in the area are mixed (Carey, Donaghue, & Broderick, 2013;Leahey & Crowther, 2008;Ridolfi, Myers, Crowther, & Ciesla, 2011;Schutz, Paxton, & Wertheim, 2002), and a meta-analysis of research on appearance comparisons and body dissatisfaction found no significant difference between the effects of comparisons to peers or thinideal media images on women's body dissatisfaction (Myers & Crowther, 2009). …”

“…Similarly, we hypothesized that exposure to an online fashion magazine would lead to more negative mood, body dissatisfaction, weight and shape discrepancy, and face, hair, and skin-related discrepancy than would exposure to an appearance-neutral control website. Given that no previous research has examined the difference between exposure to Facebook vs. a magazine (online or in print), and given that previous research on comparisons to peers and models is mixed (Carey et al, 2013;Leahey & Crowther, 2008;Ridolfi et al, 2011;Schutz et al, 2002), no specific hypotheses were made regarding Facebook vs. the online fashion magazine. Finally, appearance comparison tendency was predicted to moderate the relationship between exposure to an assigned website (Facebook, online fashion magazine, control) and state negative mood, body dissatisfaction, and appearance discrepancies.…”

Reaction Times to Appearance-Related or Non-appearance-Related Word Choice Among Women With and Without Eating Psychopathology

“…Sampling experiences at the moment they occur in the naturalistic setting maximizes the generalizeability of the findings (Stone and Shiffman 1994). In recent years, EMA methodology has been used to examine constructs related to body image disturbance and Cogn Ther Res (2015) 39:204-214 205 disordered eating in the naturalistic environment (e.g., Leahey et al 2007;Melnyk et al 2004;Myers et al 2012;Ridolfi et al 2011;Rudiger et al 2007;Smyth et al 2001;Wonderlich et al 2007). Indeed, a recent meta-analysis revealed that EMA methodology is invaluable in testing models of eating psychopathology (Haedt-Matt and Keel 2011).…”

“…Two participants were excluded due to lost EMA data. In addition, in keeping with previous studies using this method of data collection (e.g., Ridolfi et al 2011), four participants were excluded because they responded to the diary prompts less than 20 % of the time. Mean age for the final sample of 93 participants was 19.53 (SD = 3.37), and mean BMI was 24.15 (SD = 5.41).…”

“…As part of a larger study (Myers et al 2012;Ridolfi et al 2011), participants met with either the first or second author in small groups of two to seven participants. Participants completed informed consent followed by a series of questionnaires, including the Demographic Questionnaire, EDDS, and ASI.…”