We conducted a controlled randomized preliminary trial of a modified dissonance-based eating disorder program (n = 24) compared to an assessment-only control condition (n = 23) via a longitudinal design (baseline, postintervention, 2-month follow-up) in a community sample of women (N = 47) with clinical (n = 22) and subclinical (n = 25) eating disorder symptoms.
The traditional content of the Body Project, a dissonance-based eating disorder prevention program, was modified to include verbal, written, and behavioral exercises designed to dissuade self-objectification and maladaptive social comparison. Women with clinical and subclinical symptoms were included in the target audience to investigate both the treatment and the indicated prevention utility of the modified dissonance program. Body dissatisfaction, self-esteem, self-objectification, thin-ideal internalization, maladaptive social comparison, trait anxiety, and eating disorder symptoms were evaluated in the control and the modified dissonance condition at baseline, postintervention, and 2-month follow-up.
We predicted a statistically significant 2 (condition: control, modified dissonance) x 3 (time: baseline, postintervention, 2-month follow-up) interaction in the mixed factorial multivariate analyses of variance results. Results confirmed this hypothesis. Eating disorder risk factors and symptoms decreased significantly among participants in the modified dissonance condition at postintervention and 2-month follow-up compared to baseline; symptom improvement was greater among participants in the modified compared to the control condition. A secondary analysis indicated symptom improvement did not vary as a function of symptom status (clinical, subclinical), suggesting the program is efficacious in both indicated prevention and treatment applications.
Results provide preliminary support for the modified dissonance program.
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 09 March 2017.
All research outputs
#24,530,548
of 27,266,846 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Psychology
#910
of 992 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#291,074
of 329,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Psychology
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,266,846 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 992 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 329,724 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.
