Abstract
The present study compared the predictive relationship between various psychophysical indices of body categorization performance (Point of Subjective Equivalence (PSE), Just Noticeable Difference (JND) and Reaction Time (RT)) and male body dissatisfaction (Male Body Attitudes Scale (MBAS)) and eating disorder symptoms (Eating disorders examination questionnaire (EDE-Q)), with performance on a validated figure rating scale (Visual Body Scale for Men (VBSM)). Body Mass Index, body fat percentage, and fat free mass index were also measured. PSE was not as sensitive in predicting body dissatisfaction and eating disorder symptoms as the VBSM. JND and average RT were found to be sensitive predictors of body dissatisfaction and eating disorder symptoms across the 82 male participants. JND proved to be a better indicator of weight concern than the VBSM-M. Whilst the body categorization task offers new insights into the way body images may be processed by males with different levels of body dissatisfaction, the VBSM and the conventional self-report measures are likely to be clinically more efficacious at measuring body dissatisfaction.
Highlights
Body dissatisfaction is defined as negative evaluation of one’s body size and/or shape
The present study aims to explore the relationship between psychophysical performance indices derived from our Body Categorization Task (PSE, JND, and Response Time (RT)) and conventional psychological measures of male body image, such as body dissatisfaction, eating disorder symptomology, and biometric data (Body Mass Index (BMI), body fat percentage, and Fat Free Mass Index (FFMI))
Visual Body Scale for Men (VBSM)-M perceived scores were positively correlated with all three biometric measures, and Visual Body Scale for Men-Muscularity (VBSM-M) dissatisfaction scores were positively correlated with Male Body Attitudes Scale (MBAS) Muscularity Dissatisfaction, and negatively correlated with all three biometric measures
Summary
Body dissatisfaction is defined as negative evaluation of one’s body size and/or shape. Consider the following item from the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q)10: “Have you had a definite desire to have a totally flat stomach?” When responding to this item, it is ambiguous to which biometric factor (i.e. body fat or muscle) the item refers. The MOCS paradigm was applied to a Body Categorization Task in which the task-relevant stimulus dimension involved systematic variation in visual representations of male muscularity or body fat. This Body Categorization Task required participants to make dichotomous categorization decisions about sequentially presented images of male bodies. In the other experimental block participants were asked to categorize body stimuli varying in their representation of body fat percentage as either ‘skinny’ or ‘fat’
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
