Perceived match between own and observed models’ bodies: influence of face, viewpoints, and body size

Abstract

People are generally unable to accurately determine their own body measurements and to translate this knowledge to identifying a model/avatar that best represents their own body. This inability has not only been related to health problems (e.g. anorexia nervosa), but has important practical implications as well (e.g. online retail). Here we aimed to investigate the influence of three basic visual features—face presence, amount of viewpoints, and observed model size—on the perceived match between own and observed models’ bodies and on attitudes towards these models. Models were real-life models (Experiment 1) or avatar models based on participants’ own bodies (Experiment 2). Results in both experiments showed a strong effect of model size, irrespective of participants’ own body measurements. When models were randomly presented one by one, participants gave significantly higher ratings to smaller- compared to bigger-sized models. The reverse was true, however, when participants observed and compared models freely, suggesting that the mode of presentation affected participants’ judgments. Limited evidence was found for an effect of facial presence or amount of viewpoints. These results add evidence to research on visual features affecting the ability to match observed bodies with own body image, which has biological, clinical, and practical implications.

Use of a real-life practical context changes the relationship between implicit body representations and real body measurements

“…Based on this research, we hypothesized that own concrete and ideal body representations would show a stronger relationship than own concrete and own abstract body representations. Furthermore, in line with research that has shown that body size/shape estimation is affected by bodily self-esteem 26 , personality traits 61 , and body (dis)satisfaction with certain body parts 42 , 64 , we hypothesized that body estimation in the current study would be influenced by these psychological differences.…”

“…own concrete body representation), using a data-driven method measuring implicit offline body representations for the first time. We hypothesized that framing own body estimation in a practical context would increase the relationship between perceived body measurements based on implicit offline body representations and real own body measurements, contrary to the absence of such a relationship when no such context is provided 26 or when this relationship is measured explicitly 61 .…”

“…One practical, real-life scenario, where participants are asked to judge perceived body size in relationship to a specific, well-known practical use, is provided by the online clothes shopping experience. A recent study suggests that the discrepancy between real and perceived body size persists when making an explicit choice about which model participants would use in an online clothes shopping environment 61 , even though it has been shown that these environments would greatly benefit (e.g. more purchase intentions) from an increased resemblance between the consumer and the online model/avatar 62 .…”

The Perceived Match Between Observed and Own Bodies, but Not Its Accuracy, Is Influenced by Movement Dynamics and Clothing Cues

“…First, while we are used to experience our own body in movement, movement dynamics have thus far not been included when investigating own-perceived body matching, although action and motor experience have been shown to be important in the development and maintenance of body ownership (e.g., Dummer et al, 2009 ; Nava et al, 2018 ). Second, the avatar/model bodies during own-perceived body matching are usually presented either without clothing (e.g., De Coster et al, 2020 ) or with static clothing that does not provide additional cues (e.g., wrapping of different sizes of clothing around the body, movement of clothing when body moves) for body size estimation (e.g., Cornelissen et al, 2017 ; Mölbert et al, 2018 ; Thaler et al, 2018 ; Sadibolova et al, 2019 ). While it has been shown that dynamics play an important role in the perception of clothing ( Aliaga et al, 2015 ) and that observers are able to infer certain body properties (e.g., body stiffness) from clothing dynamics ( Romero et al, 2020 ), as well as the clothing’s mechanical properties ( Bi and Xiao, 2016 ), the question whether body size can be predicted by these dynamics and whether own-perceived body matching would be improved by these additional cues remain open questions.…”

“…More specifically, we expected them to show a preference for smaller- compared to bigger-sized avatars, irrespective of their own body size. Importantly, we contextualized the task of matching own and perceived body in a real-life situation by (1) comparing the accuracy of matching participants’ own with a perceived avatar’s body that was either static or dynamic (walking avatar), (2) fitting the observed model/avatar with a computer-simulated dress in different sizes, and (3) specifically asking participants about their wish to use the perceived model/avatar for online shopping ( De Coster et al, 2020 ). Concerning the effect of movement dynamics, we hypothesized that the addition of dynamic movement cues would increase participants’ ability to accurately determine their own body size/shape given the additional information that these movement cues provide and the resemblance to our everyday real-life environment.…”