Body shame. We used the body shame subscale of the Objectified Body Consciousness Scale (McKinley & Hyde, 1996).
Consistent with Hypothesis 1, women had significantly higher scores than did men on the following variables: body surveillance, t(430) = -3.03, p < .001, Cohen's d = .38; body shame, t(430) = -4.27, p< .001, Cohen's d = .41; appearance anxiety, t(430) = -3.87, p < .001, Cohen's d =.38; internal awareness, t(430) = -3.51, p < .001, Cohen's d = .34; and disordered eating, t(430) = -9.47, p < .001, Cohen's d = .91.
The present study addressed the aforementioned gaps in the literature by testing a path model that included ethnicity, spirituality, religiosity, body shame, BMI and age as risk factors for eating disorder symptomatology in men.
Body shame. Body shame was measured using two items from the body shame (BS) subscale of the Objectified Body Consciousness scale (OBC: McKinley & Hyde, 1996).
In Step 2, an additional and significant 14% of variance was explained by the addition of OBC factors, body surveillance and body shame. DMS maintains significance ([beta] = .25, p < .001) in this model and both body surveillance ([beta] = .25, p < .001) and body shame ([beta] = .20, p < .001) attain significance.
Finally, whilst non significant differences were found between groups in relation to levels of body shame and body surveillance, it was noted that the homosexual men reported slightly higher levels (though still only in the mild to moderate range) when compared to heterosexual men.
Body shame. Body shame was measured as a continuous variable using the body shame subscale of the Objectified Body Consciousness scale (OBC: McKinley & Hyde, 1996).
During class time, participants completed a questionnaire comprised of demographic questions and standardized measures of body shame and eating disorder symptomatology.
Internal consistencies for the surveillance, body shame, and appearance control belief scales have been reported as .89, 75; and .72 (McKinley & Hyde, 1996), .76, .70, and .68 (McKinley, 1998) and .79, .84, and .76 (McKinley, 1999) respectively.
There were statistically significant positive relationships between objectification experiences and two of the components of OBC, body surveillance and body shame. There was no statistically significant relationship between objectification experiences and appearance control beliefs.
For instance, McKinley (1999) found that body shame had significant negative correlations with multiple dimensions of psychological well-being, including autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations, purpose in life, and self-acceptance, whereas body surveillance had significant negative relations with most dimensions of well-being, notably autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, purpose in life, and self-acceptance.
The OBC scale is composed of three separate but related eight-item subscales: Body Surveillance (viewing the body as an outside observer), Body Shame (feeling shame when the body does not conform to accepted societal standards), and Appearance Control Beliefs (the amount of control a woman believes she has over her appearance).
The hypothesis that the Body shame of the participants in the intervention group would decrease and that this decrease would be greater than that of the control group was supported (see Table 2).
Consistent with research indicating that body image dissatisfaction is 'normative' in women (e.g., McLaren & Kuh, 2004; Rodin et al., 1984; Tiggemann, 2001) the results of the study show that all women in both the control and intervention groups experienced body dissatisfaction, Body shame and surveillance, and indicated that they perceived that their body image impacted negatively on their quality of life.
While 34 of the women reported that they have experienced lives of ridicule, body shame
and numerous attempts to lose weight, 26 reported positive change when they embodied "size acceptance ideology."