| Title |
A database of body-only computer-generated pictures of women for body-image studies: Development and preliminary validation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Behavior Research Methods, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13428-016-0703-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joanna M. Moussally, Lucien Rochat, Andrés Posada, Martial Van der Linden |
| Abstract |
The body-shape-related stimuli used in most body-image studies have several limitations (e.g., a lack of pilot validation procedures and the use of non-body-shape-related control/neutral stimuli). We therefore developed a database of 61 computer-generated body-only pictures of women, wherein bodies were methodically manipulated in terms of fatness versus thinness. Eighty-two young women assessed the pictures' attractiveness, beauty, harmony (valence ratings), and body shape (assessed on a thinness/fatness axis), providing normative data for valence and body shape ratings. First, stimuli manipulated for fatness versus thinness conveyed comparable emotional intensities regarding the valence and body shape ratings. Second, different subcategories of stimuli were obtained on the basis of variations in body shape and valence judgments. Fat and thin bodies were distributed into several subcategories depending on their valence ratings, and a subcategory containing stimuli that were neutral in terms of valence and body shape was identified. Interestingly, at a descriptive level, the thinness/fatness manipulations of the bodies were in a curvilinear relationship with the valence ratings: Thin bodies were not only judged as positive, but also as negative when their estimated body mass indexes (BMIs) decreased too much. Finally, convergent validity was assessed by exploring the impacts of body-image-related variables (BMI, thin-ideal internalization, and body dissatisfaction) on participants' judgments of the bodies. Valence judgments, but not body shape judgments, were influenced by the participants' levels of thin-ideal internalization and body dissatisfaction. Participants' BMIs did not significantly influence their judgments. Given these findings, this database contains relevant material that can be used in various fields, primarily for studies of body-image disturbance or eating disorders. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 33% |
| Austria | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 67 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 12% |
| Researcher | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 22% |
| Unknown | 17 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 27 | 40% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 22 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 December 2019.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#1,635
of 2,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#246,648
of 405,737 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#24
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 405,737 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.