Further Investigation of the Validity and Reliability of the Photographic Figure Rating Scale for Body Image Assessment

Abstract

Previous studies have not fully investigated the psychometric properties of the Photographic Figure Rating Scale (PFRS). In 2 studies, we report on the test-retest reliability and convergent validity of ratings derived from the PFRS. In Study 1, 322 female university students in Britain provided self-ratings on the PFRS and objectively measured body mass index (BMI); a subsample of 132 women also completed the task after 5 weeks. In Study 2, 243 women from the community in Austria completed the PFRS along with a battery of other body image scales. Results of Study 1 showed that ratings on the PFRS had good test-retest reliability (all rs> .87) and good convergent validity in relation to BMI. Results of Study 2 showed that PFRS-derived body dissatisfaction scores were significantly correlated with a range of body image variables. These results provide evidence for the convergent validity and good test-retest reliability of the PFRS.

Body image and personality: Associations between the Big Five Personality Factors, actual‐ideal weight discrepancy, and body appreciation

“…A measure of actual-ideal weight discrepancy was computed as the difference between unsigned (absolute) current and ideal ratings, such that more positive scores indicate greater actual-ideal weight discrepancy (Swami & Tovée, 2009). Previous work has shown that scores derived from the PFRS have good patterns of validity and good test-retest reliability after a three-week interval (Swami, Salem et al, 2008;Swami et al, 2011Swami et al, , 2012.…”

“…Body image measures. Participants completed the PFRS (Swami, Salem et al , 2008; German translation: Swami et al , 2012) and the BAS (Avalos et al , 2005; German translation: Swami, Stieger et al , 2008), both as described in Study 1. Cronbach’s α for the BAS in this study was 0.88.…”

What is the relationship between facets of narcissism and women's body image?

“…Responses were made on a 10-point scale (1 = Figure with the lowest BMI, 10 = Figure with the highest BMI) and a measure of actual-ideal weight discrepancy was computed as the difference between unsigned (absolute) current and ideal ratings, such that higher scores reflect greater weight discrepancy. The PFRS has good indices of validity and test-retest reliability (Swami et al, 2008(Swami et al, , 2012.…”

Weight Bias Against Women in a University Acceptance Scenario

“…This finding is perhaps unsurprising, given that the same figure is also typically selected as the most physically attractive and ideal by Western participants (e.g., Swami, Buchanan, Furnham, & Tovée, 2008;Swami et al, 2012;Swami, Taylor, & Carvalho, 2011). That is, it is likely that, in our participants' perceptions, "what was beautiful was good" (Dion, Berscheid, & Walster, 1972); the underweight figure, which may have been perceived as maximally attractive, was likely judged as having more desirable qualities than less attractive figures.…”

“…Because this stimulus set consists of standardized, grayscale images of women in front view and with their faces obscured, we were able to rule out possible confounding variables associated with the targets, such as age and ethnicity Swami, Stieger et al, 2012), although it also meant that we had to limit our study to female targets. Nevertheless, it should be noted that weight bias in higher educational settings appears to be more pronounced for women than men (Canning & Mayer, 1966;Crandall, 1991Crandall, , 1995.…”