Structure of Body-Build Stereotypes: A Methodological Analysis

Abstract

College students ( N = 182) were Ss in a study assessing the comparability of body build stereotypes as depicted through the use of various response formats. Stereotypes toward Endomorph and Mesomorph body types, respectively, were derived through responses to: (1) a traditional, forced-choice format; (2) a dimensionalized, bipolar item format requiring placement of 10 Endomorphs and 10 Mesomorphs, respectively, along each of 10 nine-point dimensions; (3) a format identical to Number 2 except in the requirement of only one Endomorph or Mesomorph attribution per dimension; and (4) a format requiring the estimation of the percentage of time an Endomorph and a Mesomorph, respectively, manifested the item-characteristic. Results indicated that although mean responses derived from the latter three methods were consistent in direction with corresponding forced-choice, frequency data, the intradimensional separation of most of these means was not markedly disparate; moreover, correlations between forced-choice responses and any and all of the latter methods were markedly low, although correlations among these latter methods were moderate. It was concluded that inferences drawn about the structure of body build stereotypes, based on data derived from forced-choice formats, were not supported by the data provided with the latter three formats. Implications for other stereotype research were discussed.

Predictors of Fat Stereotypes among 9‐Year‐Old Girls and Their Parents

“…The majority of research on anti‐fat attitudes has adopted a forced choice format. However, this methodology has been criticized (55, 56) because it is likely to overestimate the presence of negative attitudes toward obese individuals. As stated by Jarvie et al (56), forced choice scenarios guarantee that a cooperative participant will stereotype.…”

Some of My Friends are Fat, others are Thin and Some are Built like Arnold Schwarzenegger: A Body Typing Exercise That Teaches Critical Thinking

“…The use of a single prototype for each somatotype (Powell, Tutton and Stewart, 1974) and the unipolarity of trait assignments (Stager and Burke, 1982) have both been criticised in somatotyping studies. The forced-choice method (Lerner, Knapp and Pool, 1974;Powell et al, 1974) has also been criticised because it can magnify minor differences in the assignments of characteristics to body types (Stager and Burke, 1982). In fact, the forced-choice procedure is likely to contribute to the high reliability of success in this class exercise, thereby giving students first-hand experience with this design limitation.…”