This study investigated long-term impacts of whole-body scanning. A total of 91 women completed a retrospective online questionnaire. Quantitative data revealed that 31 (34%) reported greater body dissatisfaction since the scan, and only 6 (7%) reported increased satisfaction. Positive change in satisfaction was predicted by current body satisfaction but not by body mass index (BMI) at time of scanning or by age. BMI did not predict satisfaction with the scanner process or likelihood of being rescanned, though a longer gap between scanning and questionnaire completion predicted satisfaction with the process. Inductive thematic analysis of responses to an open-ended question suggested that although women were comfortable being scanned and wanted to see an accurate and objective view of their size and shape, they also felt threatened and vulnerable when seeing their bodies on the printed output. It is concluded that whole-body scanning should be used with caution, particularly with women with existing body concerns.
AghekyanM.UlrichP.ConnellL. (2012). Using body scans in assessing perceptions of body attractiveness and size: Cross-cultural study. International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, 5, 81–89.
2.
ArmitageC. J. (2012). Evidence that self-affirmation reduces body dissatisfaction by basing self-esteem on domains other than body weight and shape. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53, 81–88.
3.
BougourdJ. P.DekkerL.Grant RossP.WardJ. P. (2000). A comparison of women’s sizing by 3D electronic scanning and traditional anthropometry. Journal of Textiles Institute, 91, 163–173.
CalogeroR. M.PinaA.SuttonR. M. (2014). Cutting words: Priming self-objectification increases women’s intentions to pursue cosmetic surgery. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38, 197–207.
6.
CashT. (2000). Users’ manual for the multidimensional body-self relations questionnaire. Retrieved from the author onhttp://www.body-images.com
7.
CornelissenP. L.JohnsA.ToveeM. J. (2013). Body size over-estimation in women with anorexia nervosa is not qualitatively different from female controls. Body Image, 10, 103–111.
8.
DominaT.HeubergerR.MacGillivrayM. (2008). Examination of body image issues and willingness to be scanned. Women and Health, 46, 99–116.
9.
FredricksonB. L.RobertsT. A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173–206.
10.
FrithH. (2012). Appearance and society. In RumseyN.HarcourtD. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the psychology of appearance (pp. 10–23). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
11.
GrippoK. P.HillM. S. (2008). Self-objectification, habitual body monitoring, and body dissatisfaction in older European American women: Exploring age and feminism as moderators. Body Image, 5, 173–182.
12.
GroganS. (2008). Body image: Understanding body dissatisfaction in men, women and children (2nd ed.). London, England: Routledge.
13.
GroganS.FlettK.Clark-CarterD.GoughB.DaveyR.RichardsonD.RajaratnamG. (2010). Women smokers’ experiences of an age-appearance anti-smoking intervention: A qualitative study. British Journal of Health Psychology, 16, 675–689.
14.
GroganS.GillS.BrownbridgeK.KilgariffS.WhalleyA. (2013). Dress fit and body image: A thematic analysis of women’s accounts during and after trying on dresses. Body Image, 10, 380–388.
15.
HarrellZ. A.FredericksonB. L.PomerleauC. S.Nolen-HoeksemaS. (2006). The role of trait self-objectification in smoking among college women. Sex Roles, 54, 735–743.
16.
IstookC. L. (2000). Rapid prototyping in the textile and apparel industry: A pilot project. Journal of Textile and Apparel Technology and Management, 1, 1–14.
17.
LokerS.AshdownS.CarnriteE. (2008). Dress in the third dimension: Online interactivity and its new horizons. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 26, 164–176.
18.
LokerS.CowieL.AshdownS.LewisV. D. (2004). Female consumers’ reactions to body scanning. Clothes and Textile Research Journal, 22, 151–160.
SpectorP. (2004). Social desirability bias. In Lewis-BeckM.BrymanA.LiaoT. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of social science research methods (pp. 1045–1046). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21.
StraussA.CorbinJ. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London, England: Sage.
22.
TC2. (2011). KX-16 3D Body Scanner: For apparel, health/fitness/medical, entertainment/gaming, and virtual worlds. Cary, NC: Author.
23.
TiggemannM.AndrewR. (2012). Clothing choices, weight, and trait self-objectification. Body Image, 9, 409–412.
24.
TiggemannM.McCourtA. (2013). Body appreciation in adult women: Relationships with age and body satisfaction. Body Image, 10, 624–627.
25.
TylkaT. L. (2011). Positive psychology perspectives on body image. In CashT. F.SmolakL. (Eds.), Body image: A handbook of science, practice, and prevention (pp. 56–64). New York, NY: Guilford.
26.
TylkaT. L.HillM. S. (2004). Objectification theory as it relates to disordered eating among college women. Sex Roles, 51, 719–720.
