Am I Hot Enough?
A cross sectional study about sexualized media content and its
association with young women’s body image
Master Thesis
Graduate School of Communication
Magali Kuils
Student number: 11393734
Supervisor: J.M.F. van Oosten
30-06-2017
Abstract
Reality TV and Instagram often show sexualized images of women, which then are perceived as normal, because they are perceived as real. The question of this study was how these ‘real’ media types influence self-objectification and body dissatisfaction in young women.
It was hypothesised that women who frequently watch reality TV or use Instagram and/or see a lot of sexualized content in reality TV and Instagram would have higher levels of self-objectification and body dissatisfaction. Furthermore, it was expected that these
relationships would be moderated by ethnic identification with media character and social pressure from peers and family.
Results from an online survey among 123 young women showed that Reality TV does not predict the levels of self-objectification and body dissatisfaction, nor are there significant moderating effects on ethnic identification and social pressure from peers and family in this relationship.
However, there was a significant positive prediction of body dissatisfaction by sexualized content on Instagram, and by social pressure from peers and family. Therefore this research shows that in this case, pressure from peers and family on appearance and
sexualized content on social media have a stronger a stronger association with women’s body dissatisfaction, than does reality TV.
Introduction
Beauty is a broad concept and can be found all over the world, in all shapes, colors and sizes. That is what we know, however, the media teaches us something else. Being beautiful means something different to everyone, but in the western society, it means you have to be skinny, sexy and have a light skin color.
Television, magazines, films, billboards, and the like, frequently offer a distorted vision of the world (López-Guimerà. Levine, Sánchez-carracedo & Fauquet, 2010). The media message a narrow and unattainable beauty image that is seen and experienced as real and normative. Since it is hard to distinguish whether these images are real or not, people and women, in particular, are vulnerable to these messages (Frederickson & Robters, 1997). These narrow messages used to be spread through traditional media, such as television and magazines (Brown & Tiggeman, 2016). Today, they are also spread through newer media like social media and also in Reality Television. Social media and reality TV often portray peers or people that are alike to the audiences. Because of this ‘normal’ content of ordinary life, it makes it easier for media users to identify with characters and internalize messages they spread (Beck, Hellmueller, & Aeschbacher, 2012). Internalization of these messages can result in body image disturbances.
The sexualized content in the media is a part of the unattainable beauty ideals that the media portray (Vandenbosch, Muise, Eggermont, & Impett, 2015). Most of the studies about sexualized media content were focused on traditional media such as magazines and television (Levin & Harrison, 2004; Levine & Murnen, 2009). But, today’s media does not longer exists out of Television and magazines solely. Social media keep growing (Marketingfacts, 2017) and reality TV can be found on almost every channel and is one of the most popular TV genres in Western television at the moment (Ward, Seabrook, Manago & Reed, 2015). Therefore, the first aim of this study is to focus on the relationship between Reality
TV/Instagram and body image (i.e., self-objectification and body dissatisfaction). Reality TV and Instagram are particularly interesting to study because of their high level of perceived realness. Because of the suggested reality, they have high potential to influence viewers (Beck et al., 2012). Furthermore, a lot of reality TV shows have a strong emphasis on sexualized messages (Vandenbosch, Vervloessem, & Eggermont, 2013).
Moreover, although social media and reality TV are highly associated with self-objectification and body dissatisfaction, there are also women according to research that are less affected by the beauty ideals in the media. For example, studies have shown that African American women are sometimes less affected when they do not compare themselves with the white beauty ideal (López-Guimerà et al., 2010). These differences with Caucasian women, may be caused by the fact that women of color simply do not compare themselves with Caucasian women. But, the relationship between sexualized media content and body image can also be moderated by pressure from family and peers. Families all have different upbringings which could influence the way women think about their selves (Rodgers &Chabrol, 2009). The second aim of the study is therefore to see whether ethnic
identification with media character, but also pressure from family and peers, moderate the relationship between the use of reality TV/social media and body Instagram.
Finally, this study focuses on emerging adults, who are frequent consumers of Reality TV and Instagram (Hootsuite, 2016). This is an important contribution to the literature because according to Vandenbosch and Eggermont (2015) there has to be done more research on self-objectification with emerging adults since they are in the phase of developing an identity. Thus, the research question that is aimed to be answered in the present study is: To what extent is there a relationship between sexualized content in reality TV/Instagram and body image and what roles do ethnic identification with a media character, and social pressure from peers and family have within this relationship?
Theoretical framework Sexualized Media Content: Reality TV and Social Media
Sexualization is described in four criteria by the American Psychological Association (2007) as (a) evaluating individuals based on their sexual appeal/behavior, (b) equating standards of appearance to being sexually attractive, (c) sexual objectification, (d) and/or inappropriately imposing sexuality on individuals (Zubriggen, Collins, Lamb, Roberts, Tolman, Ward & Blake, (2010). In media there is a tension of evaluating women based on their sexual appeal and behavior. Several scholars have reported that female media characters are frequently admired for their “sexiness” (Kim, Sorsoli, Collins, Zylbergold, Schooler, & Tolman, 2007) which implies that sexiness is one of the most important features of a woman. When people are solely focused on these attributes and not on the character of a person, they are objetifying. The cultural practice of sexualization is found when a tremendous emphasis is put on individuals’ sexuality or appearances, while ignoring personalities. Especially women’s bodies have been sexualized following the well-known sexual double standard of women as sexual object and men as sexually dominant (Frederickson & Roberts, 1997) Furthermore popular primetime programs have been found to regularly show men that compliment women for their sexual appeal (Ward, 1995). Which can be seen as (inappropriately) imposing sexuality on individuals.
In a Belgian study done by Vandenbosch et al. (2013) about music videos, it was found that sexualization was present in 39.3% of all the scenes they coded. One out of four scenes made a connection between (mostly female) characters’ adherence to narrowly defined body ideals and sexual attractiveness. The study supports the APA’s (2007) claim that important social agents such as music entertainment channels, are increasingly promoting a sexually objectifying lifestyle, by airing TV programs with sexual content. According to
Vandenbosch et al., (2013) the most frequent types of sexualized content is the message that sexual attractiveness with having a slim, well-shaped body is more important than having a good personality. Many studies in the past have focused on sexualization in mass media, but not that much on reality TV and social media (Daniels & Zurbriggen, 2016). Additionally, reality TV is a genre in which sexual content is highly present (Fisher, Hill, Grube, & Gruber, 2004).
Social network sites such as Instagram are online communities in which people can interact with one another, and create, share and exchange information and ideas (Ghaznavi & Taylor, 2015). Instagram especially focuses on sharing photos and short videos with peers. Social media are highly popular among young people, and they are also a context for sexualization (Hall, West & McIntyre, 2012; Manago, Graham, Greenfield, & Salimkhan, 2008; Ringrose, 2011). Only a few studies have focused on sexualization and social media. One of those studies is the one from Kapidzic and Herring (2015). They did a study of profile pictures and indicated that 20.4% of profiles showed pictures in which adolescents wore revealing clothing (e.g., showing cleavage), furthermore 16.9% were pictures in which the user was partly undressed (e.g., wearing a swimsuit). Also, a Dutch study from Dornwaard, Moreno, van den Eijnden, Vanwesenbeeck, and ter Bogt (2014) found that a part of their sample of adolescents displayed sexual references on their social media profiles. With the rise of social media, adolescents have also been creating and sharing sexual content themselves, for example in the form of sexy self-representation on social network sites (Hall, West, & McIntyre, 2012; Hinduja & Patchin, 2008). Sexy self-representation often involves posting sexually suggestive pictures of one’s social network profile (Hinduja & Patchin, 2008; Peluchette & Karl, 2009). Together these patterns reveal that young people today regularly see girls and women portrayed in sexualized ways in social media. Although these studies are
relevant, they were focused on adolescents, therefore it is even more important that the present study focuses on emerging adults.
Reality television programs such as Jersey Shore and Keeping Up With The Kardashians, are understudied in media literature. Even though they are important to study because of their high popularity among young audiences (Bond & Drogos, 2014). They also hold high potential to influence viewers because of the suggested “reality nature” of the programming (Beck, Hellmueller, & Aeschbacher, 2012), and their strong emphasis on sexualized messages (Vandenbosch, Vervloessem, & Eggermont, 2013). These messages are likely to heighten the centrality in women’s self-concept (Vandenbosch et al., 2015).
Analysis indicate that in reality TV shows like Jersey Shore and Keeping Up With The Kardashians female cast members exposed their bodies more than 50% of the time and exhibited higher rates of body exposure than male cast members (Flynn et al., 2015).
Furthermore, dating reality shows were shown to contain six references per hour to women as sexual objects (Ferris et al. 2007). Vandenbosch et al., (2013) showed that being exposed to sexualized reality TV is associated with self-objectification. In addition, the more frequently these perceptions, the higher the likelihood that these perceptions become permanently accessible.
Sexualized Media Content and Its Association With Self-Objectification and Body Dissatisfaction
Frederickson and Roberts (1997) have posited the Objectification Theory. This theory places the female body in a sociocultural context, suggesting that because of societal values emphasizing women’s appearance, women learn to view themselves primarily through an observer’s perspective (Frederickson & Roberts, 1997). They also claim that in the media, sexualized content seems to be more focused on women than on men. According to objectification theory, women are constantly subject to appraisal of their appearance.
Frederickson and Roberts (1997) say women internalize the sexual objectification they experience from society and begin to self-objectify. Self-objectification is the adoption of an outsider’s perspective of one’s physical self and is marked by putting the appearance of the body before its functioning in one’s physical self-concept as well as in one’s more general sense of value as a person (Frederickson & Roberts, 1997).
Trait Self-objectification is a character trait that is rather stable across situations. It can create several health risks for young women including an increased likelihood of depression, eating disorders and sexual dysfunction (Moradi & Huang, 2008). However, self-objectification can also be a state, that is activated through exposure of sexualized content. The more someone is exposed to sexualized content, the higher the likelihood that these perceptions become permanent and thus change into trait self-objectification (Vandenbosch et al., 2013)
Next to its influence on self-objectification, several studies have also shown that media portrayals of idealized women play a significant role in women’s negative body image (Grabe & Hyde,2009; Groesz, Levine & Murnen, 2001; Tiggeman & Slater, 2003). Women who incorporate, or internalize, sexualized stereotypes in their sense of self have greater body dissatisfaction and disordered eating (Frederickson, Roberts, Noll, Quinn, & Twenge, 1998; Impet et al., 2011; Gervais et al., 2011). Body dissatisfaction consists of negative beliefs and feelings about one’s shape and weight (López-Guimerà et al., 2010). Women who are dissatisfied with their body are mostly unhappy with certain parts of their body. For example they find their hips or stomach too large (Myers & Crowther, 2007).
Women become dissatisfied with their body because of what they see in the media and because they are unable to meet the socio-culturally determined beauty idea (Crowther & Myers, 2007).
Research shows that women regularly evaluate their appearance by comparing themselves to others (Leahey, Crowther, & Mickelson, 2007). This can be explained by Social Comparison Theory (Fardouly & Vartanian, 2015; Vandenbosch et al., 2013; López-Guimerà et al., 2010) which states that people determine their social and personal worth based on how they stack up against others. As a result, we are constantly making self and other evaluations across a variety of domains (for example attractiveness, wealth, intelligence, and success). When women see sexualized images, they either make a downward comparison, which will make them feel better about themselves, or an upward comparison which will make them feel less about themselves. The upward comparison can result in body dissatisfaction (López-Guimerà et al, 2010). In line with this idea, studies have shown that a greater tendency to engage in appearance comparisons is associated with a high level of body dissatisfaction (Myers & Crowther, 2009; Vartanian & Dey, 2013;Tiggeman & McGill, 2004; Tiggeman & Slater, 2003).
Extending Literature on Self-Objectification and Body Dissatisfaction to New Media: Social Media and Reality TV
Mass media transmit the ideas, values, norms, attitude, and behaviors that socialize and construct the social reality of those who use them for a wide variety of reasons (Bryant & Oliver, 2009). For this reason, many scholars argue that mass media are one of the principal factors behind body dissatisfaction and self-objectification (López-Guimerà et al., 2010; Ward et al., 2015). It is expected that the mechanisms that explain self-objectification and body-dissatisfaction in mass media (e.g., social comparison & objectification theory) also work for these messages that are spread through social media and reality TV. The sexualized images that are portrayed in the media can trigger a chain of psychological events, such as self-objectification and body dissatisfaction. The internalization from these messages can be
even stronger than in social media and reality TV because these media characters are seen as peers, which make them easier to compare with (Beck et al., 2012).
Social media offer an easy way to compare yourself with others. Women have reported viewing other people’s Facebook profiles in order to make comparisons to those individuals (Haferkamp, Eimler, Papadakis, & Kruck, 2012). Exposure to idealized women either in Reality TV or Instagram will create an upward social comparison and will therefore increase body dissatisfaction and self-objectification.
Reality TV and mostly Instagram picture the lives of everyone around you. When people see something a peer is doing, it will seem as more attainable than when they see a celebrity doing something (Fardouly, Diedrichs Vartanian, & Halliwell., 2015). Also Instagram and Reality TV portray images and lives of peers rather than celebrities and models who appear in other media (Hew, 2011). A life from a peer can be perceived as more comparable than that of a celebrity. In experimental research it was shown that viewing a social media profile of a peer who is physically attractive can have a negative impact on self-perceived attractiveness (Vries, de., Kühne, 2015). Earlier studies found that exposure to peers who closely match the thin ideal have been found to increase women’s body dissatisfaction (Fardouly et al., 2015).
Individual Differences in Susceptibility to Influences of Sexualized Media Content: Ethnic Identification and Family Influences
Media effects are known for the fact that they are often influenced by individual differences (Sternheimer, 2013; Valkenburg & Peter, 2013). Therefore, not every woman is influenced by the media in the same way.
First of all, culture and ethnic identification play a significant role in forming
appearance ideals, including body shapes and sizes (Debraganza & Hausenblas, 2010). These ideals vary for women across societies and cultures. Within African American culture, as
well as in Latin culture there are different body ideals compared to the Western thin ideal (López-Guimerà et al., 2010). For example, Hispanic and black women value other aspects of their appearance such as style, grooming, attitude and personality (Wood-Barcalow et al., 2010), also Hispanic women tend to be more accepting of larger and curvier bodies (Pompper & Koenig, 2004). The media portrays mostly a Western beauty ideal, which a lot of women of color can never attain. First of all, because they have a different skin colour, and secondly because a lot of times they have a different body type (López-Guimerà et al., 2010). Ethnic minorities may have comparable levels of awareness of the thin ideal but may not internalize such information because of an affiliation with a culture of origin that does not support such values and ideals (Wood-Barcalow et al., 2010).
Social Comparison theory argues that people make social comparisons with people who have the same skin colour, similar attitudes, values, and personality (DeBraganza & Hausenblas, 2010). It appears that Caucasian women socially compare themselves to all attractive females, whereas African Americans make social comparisons to other African Americans (Bruns & Carter, 2015). Given the importance of ethnic identification with media characters, the present study will investigate such ethnic identification as a moderator in the relationship between reality TV/social media and body image.
Secondly, social pressure from peers and family play a role in the relationship between sexualized media content and body image. Rodgers and Chabrol (2009) state that two main modes of influence have been proposed to account for the association between parents and their children regarding body shape and eating attitudes and behaviours. The first theory, called modelling theory, suggests that children’s body image and eating behaviours are modelled by those of their parents (Rodgers & Chabrol, 2009). The second theory places emphasis on parental attitudes towards their children’s shape, weight and eating behaviours, which are conveyed by verbal messages in the form of teasing, criticism, and encouragement
to lose or control weight (Rodgers & Chabrol, 2009). During adolescence and young adulthood parents can be considered to be primary targets for identification, and gender-role models, in particular regarding attitudes towards body shape and eating. This means that parents can have an influence on the body image of their children (Rodgers & Chabrol, 2009). For instance, perceived pressure, from peers and family is thought to increase body dissatisfaction both directly and indirectly through ideal-body stereotype internalization.
Moreover, if family and peers have the same opinion as the media, for example that a women’s worth is measured by her sexual appeal, these opinions could reinforce each other and create a double dose effect (Valkenburg & Peter, 2013). Social contexts such as opinions from parents and peers moderate media effects by exerting a converging or a contradictory influence (Valkenburg & Peter, 2013). The context-content convergence hypothesis states that media effects become stronger if the messages are the same as the opinions, values and norms in the social environment of the media user (Valkenburg & Peter, 2013). In cultivation theory, this phenomenon is called resonance: When something experienced in the media is similar to one’s social environment, it creates a “double dose” of the message, which enhances media effects (Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, & Signorielli, 1980). But if parents have a different opinion, for example because of other cultural norms, it could be that women are less likely to internalize the message from the media.
The Present Study
The present study researches the relationship between reality TV/Instagram and self-objectification and body dissatisfaction with ethnic identification and peer and family pressures as moderating variables. In this study I will also ask participants how often they watch reality TV and how often they use Instagram. Previous studies (Tiggeman & Miller, 2010; Tiggeman & Slater, 2013) suggest that women who spend more time on social media
sites feel more concerned about their body, because they compared themselves more often with peers. Besides that the frequency of time spent on social media is important, it is also important to know how much sexualized media participants encounter, because exposure to sexualized media content can result in self-objectification and body dissatisfaction
(Vandenbosch et al., 2013 López-Guimerà et al., 2010). Based on the literature and theories discussed in the theoretical framework, I aim to test the hypotheses as stated below:
H1: Women who have a high frequency of watching reality TV/using Instagram have higher levels of self-objectification (H1a) and body dissatisfaction (H1b).
H2: Women who see a lot of sexualized content in reality TV/Instagram have higher levels of self-objectification (H2a) and body dissatisfaction (H2b).
H3: Ethnic identification with media character moderates the relationship between the frequency of watching reality/using Instagram and self-objectification (H3a) and body dissatisfaction (H3b).
H4: Ethnic identification with media character moderates the relationship between the amount of sexualized content in reality TV and self-objectification (H4a) and body dissatisfaction (H4b).
H6: Peer and family pressure moderates the relationship between the frequency of watching reality TV/using Instagram and self-objectification (H5a) and body dissatisfaction (H5b) H6: Peer and family pressure moderates the relationship between the amount of sexualized content in reality TV and self-objectification (H6a) and body dissatisfaction (H6b)
Method
To study the relationship between sexualized content in Reality TV/Instagram and body dissatisfaction and self-objectification a survey study was conducted. A survey is a quantitative method to obtain data and is seen as a good method to study correlations between
variables and a lot of data from several characteristics (Bryman, 2015). The survey was in the form of a self-report because it handled personal questions about the participants body and as such reduced social desirable answers which may be likely with personal questions.
Sample
Participants were recruited through Facebook. First of all, through the personal account of the researcher, secondly through a page called ‘Black Ladies Talk’ (in order to get sufficient participants of a non-Caucasian ethnicity), and thirdly though a Facebook group called ‘Respondenten gezocht’. The call consisted of a link to the survey and the conditions for filing in the survey, namely you have to be a woman, between the ages of 18-30, and using Instagram and watch Reality TV. The target group of this study were female (young) adults between the ages of 18 and 30. Before entering the survey participants had to fill in an informed consent. They could not fill in the survey without giving consent.
The data collection took place in April/May 2017. A total of 219 people filled in the survey, but 91 people did not fill in the survey correctly or did not meet the criteria and were therefore left out in the data analysis. From the 128 women that filled in the survey correctly, 5 of them did not fill out the survey in its entire form. Therefore they were left out of the analysis, thus the analysis was done with 123 women in total. The mean age of the
participants was 23.57 (SD = 3.78) ranging from 18-40. In the survey participants were asked with what ethnicity they identified most with. The ethnic composition was as follows: white (62.6%), Black (21.1%), Hispanic (0.8%), Asian (5.7 %), and other (9.8%). Most women who filled in the survey were in University (48%), followed by Applied Studies (43.9%) and Intermediate Vocational Education (8.1%).
Variables and measurements
Exposure to reality Television and Instagram. To measure how much participants are exposed to reality TV they filled in questions about what reality TV show they watched
and how many times they’ve watched this show over a certain period of time. Before answering these questions about reality TV, the participants were given a brief explanation: Note: reality TV is television in which people are continuously filmed. It tells unscripted real-life situations and often features an unknown cast or individuals who are typically not professional actors. Sometimes reality TV shows contain celebrities. Examples are: Keeping Up with the Kardashians, Boer zoekt Vrouw, Temptation Island, Geordie Shore and The Hills.
After the explanation the following question was asked: How many times did you watch the show you mentioned in the previous question during the past year? The answering options ranged from:1 = every episode to 7 = never. These answer options were re-coded such that 1 changed into never and 7 changed into every episode. The question for Instagram was: How many times did you use Instagram in the past year? The answering options ranged from 1 = every day to 7 = never. These answer options were also re-coded into 1 = never to, and 7 = every day. For the analysis, the scores for these questions were divided in low and high. Low meaning a low score for frequency and high if participants scored high on the question. The scores were split at the median with a 0 as a low score and 1 for a high score. The frequency median for both was 6. The low group for Reality TV consisted out of 75 participants (61%) and the high group consisted out of 48 participants (39%). Although this is not an ideal distribution, it was not possible to create a better distribution. The groups for Instagram were more equally divided with 70 participants in the low group (56.9%) and 53 participants in the high group (43.1%).
Sexualization in Reality TV and Instagram. The level of sexualization was measured by asking participants what show they watched the most, and then indicating how much of the content was sexualized. The following question was asked: How many times does this program show sexualized content? Answering options ranged from: 1 = Throughout
the entire show to 7 = never. For the analysis the answering options were recoded (1 = never, 7 = throughout the entire show). The question for Instagram was as follows: How many times do you see sexualized content on Instagram? Answering options ranged from: 1= Every post to 7 = Never. These answering options were re-coded in the same way.
To make sure the participants understood what sexualized content means there was a small text accompanied with the questions: Note: sexualized content is content where people are evaluated on their sexual appeal and/or behaviour. This means that people are evaluated for the way they look. An example is the message that women must have a slim and well-shaped body and do not need a great personality. To use this data in the analysis in a similar way as the frequency scores, the participants were divided into two groups, low versus high. Participants who indicated seeing a low level of sexualized content were put into the low group, and participants who indicated seeing a lot of sexualized content were put in the high group. The groups were split at the median which for both was 4. The low group consisted of 52 participants (42.3%) and the high group consisted out of 71 participants (57.7%). The low group for Instagram consisted out of 65 participants (52.8%) and the high group out of 58 participants (47.2 %).
Self-objectification. Trait self-objectification was measured with Noll and Frederickson’s (1998) Self-Objectification Questionnaire (SOQ). In this questionnaire participants rank-ordered 10 appearance-based and competence-based body attributes according to personal importance. Five of these attributes were appearance based (sex appeal, physical attractiveness, firm/sculpted muscles, physical fitness, measurements) and five were competence based (physical coordination, health, weight, strength, energy level). Scores were obtained by separately summing the ranks for appearance-based items and competence-based items and then subtracting the sum of competence ranks from the sum of appearance ranks.
The scores ranged from -25 to 25, (M =-3.44, SD =12.06). A high score indicated a greater emphasis on appearance, which was interpreted as higher self-objectification.
Body-dissatisfaction. Body dissatisfaction was measured with a 4-item scale that was created by Probst, Vandereycken, Van Coppenolle, and Vanderlinden (1995). The four items were: “When I compare myself with my peers’ bodies, I’m dissatisfied with my own,” “I’m inclined to hide my body (for example by loose clothing)”, “When I look at myself in the mirror, I’m dissatisfied with my own body,” and “I envy others for their physical
appearance.” Participants had to indicate how much they agreed with each item using a 6-point scale ranging from 1 = never to 6 = always. An exploratory factor analysis indicated that the scale was unidimensional, explaining 63.60% of the variance. The 4-item scale also proved reliable as indicated by a Cronbach’s Alpha of .80. The mean of these 4 items formed a new variable “body dissatisfaction” (M =3.30, SD=1.00).
Ethnic identification with media character. The moderating role of ethnic identification with the media character was measured by asking participants how much the ethnicity of their favourite character in reality TV/favourite Instagrammer resembled their own ethnicity. Answering options for the question how much they resembled their ethnicity ranged from 1= completely the same, 2=almost the same, 3= a little different, and 4 = completely different. The distribution for the groups was as follows group 1: 16, group 2: 37, group 3: 26, group 4: 44. Answering options 1 and 2 were recoded to 1 = ethnic
identification, and numbers 3 and 4 were recoded to 0 which means there’s no ethnic
identification. The groups were divided as follows: Reality TV ethnic identification consisted out of 53 (43.1%) participants and the Instagram group consisted out of 61 (49.6%)
participants. The no identification group for Reality TV consisted out of 70 (56.9%) and the no identification group for Instagram consisted out of 62 (50.4%).
Body related pressure from family & peers. The moderator body related pressures from family/peers was measured with a perceived sociocultural pressure scale (Stice, Ziemba, Margolis, & Flick, 1996). This scale measures the pressure to be thin from parents, peers and media. Example questions are “I’ve felt pressure from my friends to lose weight” and “I’ve noticed a strong message from my friends to have a thin body”. The answering options ranged from 1= strongly disagree to 5 = completely agree. Since I was only interested in the pressures from family and peers, the items relating to the media were left out. This was also supported by the factor analysis, which showed that 7 out of 9 items (i.e., the items referring to pressures from parents and peers) formed one component, and that the media items loaded low on this factor. The 7 items loaded together on a component which explained 48.52% of the variance. A reliability analysis proofed that this scale was reliable (α= .82). Together these items were averaged to form a new scale body related pressures from family/peers (M = 1.93, SD = 0.73). In order to do the analysis this scale was also split at the median (1.86), with 0 as low pressure from peers and family and 1 for a high pressure. The low-pressure group consisted out of 63 (51.2%) and high-pressure group out of 60 people (48.8%).
Results
Main effects of Frequency of Watching and Amount of Sexualized Content in Reality Television. Hypothesis 1 predicted that women who have a high frequency of watching Reality TV/using Instagram have higher levels of self-objectification (H1a) and body dissatisfaction (H1b) than women who have a low frequency of watching reality TV/using Instagram. Hypothesis 2 predicted that women who see a lot of sexualized content in reality TV/Instagram have higher levels of self-objectification (H2a) and body dissatisfaction (H2b). These hypotheses were tested with separate MANOVA’s to see whether there were
dissatisfaction and self-objectification as dependent variables and frequency of watching reality TV and the amount of sexualized content in reality TV. The second MANOVA was tested with self-objectification and body dissatisfaction as dependent variables and frequency of using Instagram and the amount of sexualized content as independent variables.
Using Wilk’s Lambda, there was no significant effect of frequency of watching reality TV on self-objectification and body dissatisfaction, lambda = 0.99, F(2,114) = 0.40, p = .669. There was a significant result for the effect of frequency of using Instagram on
self-objectification and body dissatisfaction, lambda = 0.95, F(2,114) = 3.09, p < .050. Next, I explored the Individual ANOVA’s for each dependent variable to see if there were any patterns of results in line with the hypothesis. Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations of the independent variables. The effect size for the main relationships was calculated by subtracting the sum of squares corrected total from the sum of squares between groups. The ANOVA’s with frequency of watching Reality TV/using Instagram as
independent variables and self-objectification and body dissatisfaction as dependent variables showed that there was no significant effect for the frequency of watching reality TV on self-objectification F = (1,115) = 0.59, p = .445, η2 = 0.005 and body dissatisfaction F = (1,115) = 0.22, p = .643, η2 = 0.002. Women who had a high frequency of watching reality TV, did not show significant higher levels of self-objectification and body dissatisfaction than women with a low frequency of watching reality TV. The results from the Wilks Lambda, showed there were significant results, however, the univariate tests did not show significant differences between women who had a low or high frequency of using Instagram on self-objectification F(1,115) = 3.13, p = .080, η2 = 0.025 and body dissatisfaction F(1,115) = 2.97, p = .087, η2 = 0.020. Therefore hypothesis 1 can be rejected.
Note: SO means self-objectification and scores ranged from -25 to 25. BD stands for body dissatisfaction and was measured on a 6-point Likert scale.
The MANOVA showed there was no significant association between the amount of sexualized content in reality TV on self-objectification and body dissatisfaction, lambda = 1.00, F(2, 114) = 0.08, p = .923. There was a significant result for the amount of sexualized
content in Instagram on self-objectification and body dissatisfaction, lambda = 0.94, F(2,114) = 3.70, p = .028.
The individual ANOVA’S were explored to see if these results were in line with the hypotheses. The ANOVA with the amount of sexualized content as independent variable and self-objectification and body dissatisfaction as dependent variables showed that there was no significant association between the amount of sexualized in Reality TV content and self-objectification F = (1,115) = 0.06, p = .803, η2 = 0.000 and body dissatisfaction F = (1,115) = 0.10, p = .750, η2= 0.001. Also, there was no significant difference between women who indicated a high amount of sexualized content on Instagram and women who indicated a low Table 1 Means of independent
variables
Frequency Low High Total
M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) Reality TV SO 2.60 (12.89) 2.52 (9.76) 3.43 (12.06) BD 3.34 (1.00) 3.25 (1.01) 3.30 (1.00) Instagram SO 4.80 (11.74) 1.64 (12.36) 3.43 (12.06) BD 3.37 (1.02) 3.22 (0.97) 3.30 (1.00)
Amount of sex Low High Total
M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) Reality TV SO 3.65 (12.18) 3.28 (11.26) 3.43 (12.06) BD 3.33 (0.93) 3.29 (1.05) 3.30 (1.00) Instagram SO 2.02 (12.27) 5.03 (11.72) 3.43 (12.06) BD 3.21 (0.95) 3.41 (1.11) 3.30 (1.00)
amount of sexualized content for the level of self-objectification F(1,115) = 4.44, p = .092, η2 = 0.023. There was however, a significant difference between the levels for body
dissatisfaction F(1,115) = 2.88, p = .037, η2 = 0.030. Women who indicated seeing a lot of sexualized content on Instagram, had a higher level of body dissatisfaction than women who indicated a low amount of sexualized content. Therefore Hypothesis 2a is rejected and 2b is accepted.
Moderating Influence of Ethnic Identification
Hypothesis 3 predicted that ethnic identification with media character moderates the relationship between the frequency of watching reality/using Instagram and
self-objectification (H3a) and body dissatisfaction (H3b). Using Wilks Lambda, with frequency of watching reality TV and using Instagram as independent variables and self-objectification and body dissatisfaction as dependent variables, showed there was no significant result for ethnic identification and frequency of watching Reality TV/using Instagram on the dependent variables self-objectification and body dissatisfaction lambda = 0.99, F(2, 114) = 0.65, p = .527. Using Wilks Lambda, there was no significant interaction effect between Ethnic Match and frequency of using Instagram on self-objectification and body dissatisfaction lambda= 0.98, F(2, 114) = 0.82, p = .445. The separate ANOVA’s also did not show a trend in the expected direction: there was no significant interaction effect between the frequency of watching reality TV and ethnic match on self-objectification F = (1,115) = 0.27, p = .262, η2 = 0.001 or body dissatisfaction F = (1,115) = 0.03, p = .872, η2 = 0.000. Ethnic identification also showed that it did not have a significant moderating influence on the frequency of using Instagram for self-objectification F(1,115) = 0.21, p = .647, η2 = 0.020 and body
dissatisfaction F(1,115) = 1.45, p = .232, η2 = 0.010. Therefore hypothesis 3 can be rejected. Hypothesis 4 predicted that ethnic identification with media character moderates the relationship between the amount of sexualized content in reality TV/Instagram and
self-objectification and body dissatisfaction. Using Wilks Lambda, with frequency of watching reality TV and using Instagram as independent variables and self-objectification and body dissatisfaction as dependent variables, did not show a significant result for ethnic
identification and sexualized content in reality TV, lambda = 1.00, F(2, 114) = 0.18, p = .839, also there was no significant result for Ethnic identification and sexualized content on Instagram, lambda = 0,99 F(2, 114) = 0.41, p = .664. Exploring the separate ANOVA’s, there was no significant interaction effect for ethnic match and amount of sexualized content in Reality TV on self-objectification F(1,115) = 0.01, p = .946, η2 = 0.000 and body
dissatisfaction F(1,115) = 0.35, p = .556, η2 = 0.003. There also was no significant effect for the amount of sexualized on content on Instagram on self-objectification F(1,115) = 0.58, p = .447, η2
= 0.05 and body dissatisfaction F(1,115) = 0.24, p = .625, η2 = 0.020. Therefore hypothesis 4 can be rejected.
Moderating Influence: Social Pressure from Peers and Family
Hypothesis 5 predicted social pressure from peers and family moderate the relationship between the frequency of watching reality TV/using Instagram and self-objectification (H5a) and body dissatisfaction (H5b). Using Wilk’s Lambda with frequency of watching reality TV/using Instagram as independent variables and self-objectification and body dissatisfaction as dependent variables, and peer/family pressures as moderator did not show a significant result for the frequency of watching reality Television on
self-objectification and body dissatisfaction. The Wilks Lambda showed that there was no significant moderating effect between social pressure and the frequency of watching reality TV for body dissatisfaction and self-objectification, lambda = 1.00, F(2,114) = 0.15, p = .862. Also, not for the frequency of using Instagram lambda = 0.97, F(2,114) = 1.66, p = .194. Although the MANOVA was not significant, I looked at the ANOVA’s for expected trends, but there was no significant interaction effect between frequency of watching reality TV and
social pressure on self-objectification F(1,115) = 0.14, p = .710, η2 = 0.00 and body dissatisfaction F(1,115) = 0.15, p = .695, η2
= 0.000. Social pressure from peers and family did not have a significant moderating effect on the relationship between the frequency of using Instagram on self-objectification F(1,115) = 2.07, p = .153, η2 = 0.09 and body dissatisfaction F(1,115) = 1.21, p = .272, η2
= 0.010. Therefore hypothesis 5 can be rejected. Hypothesis 6 predicted that peer and family pressures moderate the relationship between the amount of sexualized content in reality TV/using Instagram and
self-objectification (H6a) and body dissatisfaction (H6b). Using Wilk’s Lambda, there was no significant interaction effect between peer and family pressures and the amount of sexualized content in Reality TV, lambda = 0.99, F(2,114) = 0.65, p = .522 and on Instagram lambda = .99, F(2, 114) = 0.12, p = .890. It appeared that the MANOVA was not significant, and looking at the ANOVA’s it showed that there was no significant interaction effect between social pressures and the amount of sexualized content on Reality TV for self-objectification F(1,115) = 0.58, p = .446, η2 = 0.01 and body dissatisfaction F(1,115) = 0.70, p = .403, η2 = 0.01. The influence of peers and family also did not have a significant moderating effect on the relationship between the amount of sexualized content on self-objectification F(1,115) = 0.010, p = .937, η2 = 0.000 and body dissatisfaction F(1,115) = 0.23, p = .631, η2 = 0.000. Therefore hypothesis 6 is rejected.
Despite the lack of a moderating influence, and although not hypothesized, a main effect was found for the prediction of body dissatisfaction by social pressures, F(1,115) = 21.72, p <.001, η2 = 0.159. Women who indicated feeling high pressure from peers and family to achieve the appearance ideal had a significant higher score on body dissatisfaction (M = 3.72, SD = 0.84) compared to women who indicated feeling low social pressure from their peers and family (M = 2.91, SD = 0.99).
Discussion & Conclusion
The current study examined to what extent there is a relationship between frequency of watching reality TV and using Instagram with women’s levels of self-objectification and body dissatisfaction. Additionally, it examined what the roles of ethnic identification, and social pressure were within these relationships.
It was expected that a high frequency of watching reality TV/using Instagram would lead to higher levels of self-objectification and body dissatisfaction. Also, it was expected that women who watch reality TV with a lot of sexualized content would have higher levels of self-objectification and body dissatisfaction. Although this was expected, there was no significant evidence for these expectations. However, there was a significant relationship between the amount of sexualized content on Instagram with body dissatisfaction. Women who indicated seeing a lot of sexualized content on Instagram, had higher levels of body dissatisfaction than women who indicated seeing a low amount of sexualized content on Instagram. This means that in this study social media is a stronger predictor for developing body dissatisfaction, than reality TV.
In this study it was expected that social pressure from peers and family, and ethnic identification would moderate the relationship between the frequency of using Reality TV /Instagram and self-objectification and body dissatisfaction. It was also hypothesized that these moderators would influence the relationship between the amount of sexualized content and self-objectification and body dissatisfaction. However, ethnic identification, and social pressures did not influence these relationships significantly. Ethnic identification did not have a direct association between sexualized content and body image, but it could be that it has an indirect association through social comparison. Earlier studies (López-Guimerà et al., 2010) did find that black women and Hispanic women mostly compare themselves with women who look like them. Their ethnic identification with a media character explains with whom
they compare themselves, rather than that it moderates the relationship between sexualized media content and body image. Ethnic identification did not have a significant moderating association with the relationship between the frequency of watching Reality TV/using Instagram and self-objectification and body dissatisfaction, it also did not have a significant effect on the relationship between the amount of sexualized content and self-objectification and body dissatisfaction.
Social pressure from peers and family was not a significant moderator between sexualized media content and body image. It was expected that social pressure would moderate between sexualized content and body image, because it can create a double dose effect (Valkenburg & Peter, 2013). An explanation for this result could be that the measure for social pressures was focused on the pressure to be thin, and not on being sexy. For future research it would be interesting to study the social pressure from peers and family to be sexy, and see if here does occur a ‘double dose’ effect.
Even though social pressure was not a significant moderator, it did appear that pressure from peers and family has a strong association with body dissatisfaction. Women who indicated feeling high pressure from peers and family to be thin and lose weight had a significant higher score on body dissatisfaction compared to women who indicated feeling low pressure from their peers and family. This finding also is in line with the earlier mentioned result for sexualized content and Instagram. Through Instagram women experience social pressure from peers and family too.
Limitations & Directions for Future Research
A limitation of the present study is the fact that the women who filled in the survey had to answer the questions about the content and the frequency of which they used Instagram or watched reality TV with their memory. This means that they might not
remember things right, which can bias the outcomes. For future research it would be better to
Comment [u1]: Ga hier ook nog
even in op de theorie die je noemt in het TF: er blijkt hier dus niet echt sprake te zijn van een double dose/resonance. Een verklaring hiervoor kan zijn dat de meting van peer en family pressure niet helemaal aansloot bij de media content meting. De social pressure meting gaat vooral om de druk om dun te zijn, terwijl de media content meting om
sexualization gaat (dus om meer dan alleen dun zijn). Wellicht moet toekomstig onderzoek zich ook richten op sociale druk om ‘sexy’ te zijn, en dat dan een double dose effect wel plaatsvindt.
do an experiment where women will either be exposed to highly sexualized media content or low sexualized media content.
In sum, the present data let us to conclude that, in this context of study, social pressure from peers and family are very important when it comes to developing body dissatisfaction. Being exposed to a lot of sexualized content on Instagram led to significant higher body dissatisfaction than did exposure to Instagram with less sexualized content. Social pressure form peers and family also led to higher body dissatisfaction. It could be that the pressure from peers also comes through Instagram, since there are many peers and people that are alike on social media (Fardouly et al., 2015). This could also explain that there was no significant association between Reality TV and body image. People who appear on TV, might be considered more as celebrities, who are a little more difficult to relate to. Reality TV and social media in this study have a different associations with young women’s body image. Although they are both perceived as media with realistic content in literature (Beck et al., 2012). Future research could focus on where the exact differences lie between these media.
Interesting research in the future would be to do a study to see why social pressure is more important than media influences when developing self-objectification and body dissatisfaction. One thing that is important from this study is that we cannot blame the media for everything. People have the tendency to point their finger to social media and superficial TV shows when someone develops a negative body image. But, as seen in this study, pressure from peers and family might be a stronger predictor for developing negative body image than social media and Reality TV.
References
American Psychological Association, Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls.
(2007). Report of the APA task force on the sexualization of girls. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved
Beck, D., Hellmueller, L. C., & Aeschbacher, N. (2012). Factual entertainment and reality TV. Communication Research Trends, 31, 4–27
Bond, B. J., & Drogos, K. L. (2014). Sex on the Shore: Wishful Identification and Parasocial Relationships as Mediators in the Relationship Between Jersey Shore Exposure and Emerging Adults’ Sexual Attitudes and Behaviors. Media Psychology, 17(1), 102–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2013.872039
Brown, Z., & Tiggemann, M. (2016). Attractive celebrity and peer images on Instagram: Effect on women’s mood and body image. Body Image, 19, 37–43.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.08.007Beck,D., Hellmueller, L.C., & Aeschbacher,N. (2012). Factual entertaint and reality TV. Communication Research
Trends, 31, 4-27
Bruns, G. L., & Carter, M. M. (2015). Ethnic differences in the effects of media on body image: The effects of priming with ethnically different or similar models. Eating Behaviors, 17, 33–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2014.12.006
Bryman, A. (2015). Social research methods. Oxford university press.
Rodgers, R., & Chabrol, H. (2009). Parental attitudes, body image disturbance and disordered eating amongst adolescents and young adults: A review. European Eating Disorders Review, 17(2), 137–151. https://doi.org/10.1002/erv.907
Dallesasse, S., & Kluck, A. (2013). Reality television and the muscular male ideal. Body Image, 10,309–315.doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2013. 02.004
DeBraganza, N., & Hausenblas, A. H. (2010). Media exposure of the ideal physique on women’s body dissatisfaction and mood: The moderating effects of ethnicity. Journal of Black Studies, 40, 700–716
Fardouly, J., Diedrichs, P. C., Vartanian, L. R., & Halliwell, E. (2015). Social comparisons on social media: THE impact of Facebook on young women’s body image concerns and mood. Body Image, 13, 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.12.002
Ferris, A. L., Smith, S.W.,Greenberg, B. S., & Smith, S. L. (2007).The content of reality dating shows and viewer perceptions of dating. Journal of Communication, 57, 490– 510. doi:10.111/j.1460-2466.2007.00354.x
Fisher, D. A., Hill, D. L., Grube, J. W., & Gruber, E. L. (2004). Sex on American tele- vision: An analysis across programgenres and network types. Journal of Broad- casting and ElectronicMedia, 48, 529–553. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4804_1
Flynn, M., Park, S., Morin, D., & Stana, A. (2015). Anything but real: Body idealization and objectification of MTV docusoap characters. Sex Roles, 72,173–182.
doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0464-2.
Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T.-A. (1997). Objectification Theory: Toward Understanding Wome’s Live Expierences and Mental Health Risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(March), 173–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x
Formatted: Font: Bold, English
Fredrickson, B. L., Roberts, T. A., Noll, S. M., Quinn, D. M., & Twenge, J. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.269.
Garner, D.M. (2002). Body image and anorexia nervosa. In T. F. Cash & T. Pruzinsky (Eds.), Body image: A handbook of theory, research, and clinical practice (pp. 295–303). New York: Guil- ford.
Gervais, S.J., Vescio, T.K., & Allen, J. (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. doi: 10.1177/0361684310386121
Grabe, S.,& Hyde, J. S. (2009). Body objectification, MTV, and psycho- logical outcomes among female adolescents. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 2840–2858. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009. 00552.x
Groesz, L. M., Levine, M. P., & Murnen, S. K. (2001). The effect of experimental pre- sentation of thin media images on body satisfaction: A meta-analytic review.
International Journal of Eating Disorders, 31, 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eat. 10005
Hall, P. C., West, J. H., & McIntyre, E. (2012). Female self-sexualization in MySpace. com personal profile photographs. Sexuality & Culture, 16(1), 1-16.
Haferkamp, N., Eimler, S., Papadakis, A. M., & Kruck, J. (2012). Men are from Mars, women are from Venus? Examining gender differences in self-presentation on social networking sites. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 15, 91–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0151
Hew, K. F. (2011). Students’ and teachers’ use of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 662–676. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.020
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2008). Personal information of adolescents on the Internet: A quantitative content analysis of MySpace. Journal of adolescence, 31(1), 125-146. Kapidzic, S., & Herring, S. C. (2015). Race, gender, and self-presentation in teen profile
photo- graphs. New Media & Society, 17, 958–976. doi:10.1177/1461444813520301 zi Kim, J. L., Sorsoli, C. L., Collins, K., Zylbergold, B. A., Schooler, D.,& Tolman, D. A.
(2007). From sex to sexuality: Exposing the hetero- sexual script on primetime television network. Journal of Sex Research, 44,145–157.
doi:10.1080/00224490701263660.
Leahey, T., Crowther, J., & Mickelson, K. (2007). The frequency, nature, and effects of naturally occurring appearance-focused social comparisons. Behavior Therapy, 38, 132– 143. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2006.06.004
Levine, M. P., & Murnen, S. K. (2009). ‘‘Everybody knows that mass media are/are not [pick one] a cause of eating disorders’’: A critical review of evidence for a causal link
between media, negative body image, and disordered eating in females. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 28, 9–42.
Levine, M. P., & Harrison, K. (2004). The role of mass media in the perpetuation and prevention of negative body image and disordered eating. In J. K. Thompson (Ed.), Handbook of eating disorders and obesity (pp. 695–717). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
López-Guimerà, G., Levine, M. P., Sánchez-carracedo, D., & Fauquet, J. (2010). Influence of Mass Media on Body Image and Eating Disordered Attitudes and Behaviors in Females: A Review of Effects and Processes. Media Psychology, 13(4), 387–416.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2010.525737
R. (2017, June 20). Sociale media in Nederland & wereldwijd | Marketingfacts Stats Dashboard. Retrieved June 29, 2017, from
http://www.marketingfacts.nl/statistieken/detail/sociale-media-in-nederland-wereldwijd Malpede, C.Z., Greene, L.F., Fitzpatrick, S.L., Jefferson, W.K., Shewchuk, R.M., Baskin,
M.L., et al. (2012). Racial influences associated with weight-related beliefs in African American and Caucasian women. In T.A. LaVeist, & L.A. Issac (Eds.), Race, ethnicity, and health: A public health reader (pp. 291–301) (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Moradi, B., & Huang, Y.-P. (2008). Objectification Theory and Psychology of Women: a Decade of Advances and Future Directions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32(2008), 377–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00452.x
Myers, T., & Crowther, J. (2009). Social comparison as a predictor of body dissatis- faction: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 118, 683–698.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016763
Paxton, S.J., Eisenberg, M.E., & Neumark-Stzainer, D. (2006). Prospective predictors of body dissatisfaction in adolescent girls and boys: A five-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 42(5), 888–899
Peluchette, J., & Karl, K. (2009). Examining students’ intended image on Facebook:“What were they thinking?!”. Journal of Education for Business, 85(1), 30-37.
Pompper, D., & Koenig, J. (2004). Cross-cultural-generational perceptions of ideal body image: Hispanic women and magazine standards. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(1), 89-107.
Probst, M., Vandereycken, W., Coppenolle, H. V., & Vanderlinden, J. (1995). The Body Attitude Test for patients with an eating disorder: Psychometric characteristics of a new questionnaire. Eating disorders, 3(2), 133-144.
Rodgers, R., & Chabrol, H. (2009). Parental attitudes, body image disturbance and disordered eating amongst adolescents and young adults: A review. European Eating Disorders Review, 17(2), 137–151. https://doi.org/10.1002/erv.907
Sternheimer, K. (2013). Connecting social problems and popular culture: Why media is not the answer. Westview Press.
Stice, E., Ziemba, C., Margolis, J., & Flick, P. (1996). The dual pathway model differentiates bulimics, subclinical bulimics, and controls: Testing the continuity hypothesis. Behavior Therapy, 27(4), 531-549.
Stice, E., Nemeroff, C., & Shaw, H. (1996). A test of the dual pathway model of bu- limia nervosa: Evidence for restrained-eating and affect regulation mechanisms. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 15, 340–363.
Sydney Parker. (2016, August 09). Top Instagram Demographics That Matter to Social Media Marketers. Retrieved May 04, 2017, from https://blog.hootsuite.com/instagram-demographics/
Tiggemann, M., & Lynch, J. E. (2001). Body image across the life span in adult women: The role of self-objectification. Developmental Psychology, 37, 243–253.
Tiggemann, M., & McGill, B. (2004). The role of social comparison in the effect of magazine advertisements on women’s mood and body dissatisfaction. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 23–44.
Tiggemann, M. & Slater, A. (2003). Thin ideals in music television: A source of social comparison and body dissatisfaction. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 35, 45-58. doi: 10.1002/eat.10214
Vandenbosch, L., & Eggermont, S. (2016). The Interrelated Roles of Mass Media and Social Media in Adolescents’ Development of an Objectified Self-Concept: A Longitudinal Study. Communication Research, 43(8), 1116–1140.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215600488
Vandenbosch, L., Muise, A., Eggermont, S., & Impett, E. A. (2015). Sexualizing reality television: Associations with trait and state self-objectification. Body Image, 13, 62–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2015.01.003
Vandenbosch, L., Vervloessem, D., & Eggermont, S. (2013). I Might Get Your Heart Racing in My Skin-Tight Jeans”. Sexualization on Music Entertainment Television, 974(May). https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2012.755640
Vartanian, L. R., & Dey, S. (2013). Self-concept clarity, thin-ideal internalization, and appearance-related social comparison as predictors of body dissatisfaction. Body Image, 10, 495–500. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.05.004
de Vries, D. A., & Kühne, R. (2015). Facebook and self-perception: Individual susceptibility to negative social comparison on Facebook. Personality and Individual Differences, 86, 217–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.029
Ward, L. M., Seabrook, R. C., Manago, A., & Reed, L. (2016). Contributions of Diverse Media to Self-Sexualization among Undergraduate Women and Men. Sex Roles, 74(1– 2), 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0548-z
Wood-Barcalow, N. L., Tylka, T. L., & Augustus-Horvath, C. L. (2010). “But I like my body”: Positive body image characteristics and a holistic model for young-adult women. Body Image, 7, 106–116. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.bodyim.2010.01.001
Zubriggen, E. L., Collins, R. L., Lamb, S., Roberts, T.-A., Tolman, D. L., Ward, L. M., & Blake, J. (2007). Report of the APA Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pi/wpo/sexualization. html
