The authors used a discrete choice conjoint design to examine the relative contributions of previously identified contextual factors (clothing, looks, company, and comments) for eliciting instances of appearance-related self-consciousness in a sample of 250 female undergraduates. The findings revealed that individuals differed in their relative weighting of each of the four contextual factors. Latent class analysis identified two distinct response profiles: one group reported appearance-related commentary as most likely to trigger an instance of appearance self-consciousness, whereas a second group prioritized self-perceived level of attractiveness as most likely to prompt self-consciousness. On average, the looks-prioritizing group that had higher body mass index were more dissatisfied with their appearance, and felt greater social pressure to conform to appearance-related standards. The use of a discrete choice conjoint design also allowed the authors to investigate the interplay between situational- and trait-based variables in the elicitation of appearance self-consciousness. Their findings suggest that the negative effects of appearance comments and/or perceived unattractiveness on appearance self-consciousness may be offset by access to a friendship network. Furthermore, the finding that individuals differed in their responses to various contextual influences on appearance-related consciousness suggests that a one-size-fits-all model of the relationship between environment and appearance self-consciousness may underestimate the complexity of this relationship. The authors discuss the treatment implications of these findings, as well as the need for further research to ensure that other, relevant contextual factors have not been neglected.
AtaR.LuddenA.LallyM. (2007). The effects of gender and family, friend, and media influences on eating behaviors and body image during adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36, 1024–1037.
2.
AubreyJ. S. (2007). The impact of sexually objectifying media exposure on negative body emotions and sexual self-perceptions: Investigating the mediating role of body self-consciousness. Mass Communication and Society, 10, 1–23.
3.
BartkyS. L. (1990). Femininity and domination: Studies in the phenomenology of oppression. New York, NY: Routledge.
4.
CalogeroR. M. (2004). A test of objectification theory: The effect of the male gaze on appearance concerns in college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 16–21.
5.
CalogeroR. M.HerbozoS.ThompsonJ. K. (2009). Complimentary weightism: The potential costs of appearance-related commentary for women’s self-objectification. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33, 120–132.
6.
CalogeroR. M.PinaA. (2011). Body guilt: Preliminary evidence for a further subjective experience of self-objectification. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 428–440.
7.
CarusoE. M.RahnevD. A.BanajiM. R. (2009). Using conjoint analysis to detect discrimination: Revealing covert preferences from overt choices. Social Cognition, 27, 128–137.
8.
CollinsK. A.WestraH. A.DozoiD. J. A.StewartS. H. (2005). The validity of the brief version of the fear of negative evaluation scale. Anxiety Disorders, 19, 345–359.
9.
FeaC. J.BrannonL. A. (2006). Self-objectification and compliment type: Effects on negative mood. Body Image, 3, 183–188.
10.
ForandN. R.GunthertK. C.GermanR. E.WenzeS. J. (2010). Appearance investment and everyday interpersonal functioning: An experience sampling study. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 380–393.
11.
FredricksonB. L.RobertsT. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173–206.
12.
FredricksonB. L.RobertsT.-A.NollS. M.QuinnD. M.TwengeJ. M. (1998). That swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 269–284.
13.
GapinskiK. D.BrownellK. D.LaFranceM. (2003). Body objectification and “fat talk”: Effects on emotion, motivation, and cognitive performance. Sex Roles, 48, 377–388.
14.
GervaisS. J.VescioT. K.AllenJ. (2011). When what you see is what you get: The consequences of the objectifying gaze for women and men. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 5–17.
15.
HagenaarsJ. A.McCutcheonA. L. (2002). Applied latent class analysis. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
16.
HairJ. F.BlackW. C.BabinB. J.AndersonR. E.TathamR. L. (2005). Multivariate data analysis. (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
17.
HartE. A.LearyM. R.RejeskiW. J. (1989). The measurement of social physique anxiety. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11, 94–104.
18.
Henderson-KingD.Henderson-KingE. I.HoffmannL. L. (2001). Media images and women’s self-evaluations: Social context and importance of attractiveness as moderators. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1407–1416.
19.
HerbozoS.ThompsonJ. K. (2006). Development and validation of the verbal commentary on physical appearance scale: Considering both positive and negative commentary. Body Image, 3, 335–344.
20.
JonesD. C.VigfusdottirT. H.YoonsunL. (2004). Body image and the appearance culture among adolescent girls and boys: An examination of friend conversations, peer criticism, appearance magazines, and the internalisation of appearance ideals. Journal of Adolescent Research, 19, 323–339.
21.
KuhfeldW. F. (1997). Efficient experimental designs using computerized searches. Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings, 6,71–86.
22.
LearyM. R. (1983). A brief version of the Fear of negative evaluation scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 371–375.
23.
LuceR. D.TukeyJ. W. (1964). Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new scale type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, 1–27.
24.
McKinleyN. M.HydeJ. S. (1996). The objectified body consciousness scale: Development and validation. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 181–215.
25.
MonroF.HuonG. (2005). Media-portrayed idealized images, body shame, and appearance anxiety. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 38, 85–90.
26.
MoradiB.DirksD.MattesonA. V. (2005). Roles of sexual objectification experiences and internalization of standards of beauty in eating disorder symptomatology: A test and extension of objectification theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 420–428.
27.
MoradiB.HuangY. (2008). Objectification theory and psychology of women: A decade of advances and future directions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 377–398.
28.
National Institute of Health. (1998). Clinical guidelines on the identification, evaluation, and treatment of overweight and obesity in adults: Evidence report. Retrieved fromwww.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/obesity/ob_gdlns.pdf.
29.
OrmeB. K. (2006). Getting started with conjoint analysis: Strategies for product design and pricing research. Madison, WI: Research Publishers.
30.
PattersonM.ChrzanK. (2004). Partial profile discrete choic\e: What’s the optimal number of attributes?. 2003 Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings (pp. 173–185). San Antonio, TX: Sawtooth Software.
31.
PeatC. M.MuehlenkampJ. J. (2011). Self-objectification, disordered eating, and depression: A test of mediational pathways. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 441–450.
32.
QuinnD. M.KallenR. W.CatheyC. (2006). Body on my mind: The lingering effect of state self-objectification. Sex Roles, 55, 869–874.
33.
RamaswamyV.CohenS. H. (2007). Latent class models for conjoint analysis. In GustafssonA.HerrmanmA.HuberF. (Eds.), Conjoint measurement methods and applications (4th ed., pp. 295–320). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
34.
RicciardelliL. A.McCabeM. P. (2002). Psychometric evaluation of the body change inventory: An assessment instrument for adolescent boys and girls. Eating Behaviors, 3, 45–59.
35.
RyanM.BateA.EastmondC. J.LudbrookA. (2001). Use of discrete choice experiments to elicit preferences. Quality in Health Care, 10, i55–i60.
36.
SalkR. H.Engeln-MaddoxR. (2011). “If you’re fat, then I’m humungous!”: Frequency, content, and impact of fat talk among college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 18–28.
37.
ShahA. K.OppenheimerD. M. (2008). Heuristics made easy: An effort-reduction framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 207–222.
38.
SzymanskiD. M.HenningS. L. (2007). The role of self-objectification in women’s depression: A test of objectification theory. Sex Roles, 56, 45–53.
39.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
40.
ThompsonJ. K.van den BergP.RoehrigM.GuardaA. S.HeinbergL. J. (2004). The sociocultural attitudes toward appearance questionnaire (SATAQ-3): Development and validation. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 35, 293–304.
41.
TiggemannM. (2001). Person x situation interactions in body dissatisfaction. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 29, 65–70.
42.
TiggemannM.BoundyM. (2008). Effect of environment and appearance compliment on college women’s self-objectification, mood, body shame, and cognitive performance. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 399–405.
43.
TiggemannM.KuringJ. K. (2004). The role of body objectification in disordered eating and depressed mood. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43, 299–311.
44.
TiggemannM.PolivyJ. (2009). Upward and downward: Social comparison processing of thin idealized media images. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 356–364.
45.
VartanianL. R. (2009). When the body defines the self: Self-concept clarity, internalisation and body image. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 28, 94–126.
