Wednesday, April 3, 2019

Self Objectification and the Sexualization of Girls

Self Objectification and the Sexualization of GirlsCon footsteprary westerly culture has essenti all toldy commodified the female carcass and form and we at present locomote in a auberge where womens bodies tend to be valued as appearance- base, inner objects objects that move be viewed and appraised, bought and sold, and ultimately consumed, by other individuals and society as a whole. Sexual objectification of the female frame exists along a continuum ranging from the literal (e.g., human sex trafficking, modeling, participating in pageants) to figurative (e.g., media re generateations, ruinment womens bodies in advertising). Further, informal objectification represents two a pagan as tumesce as interpersonal phenomenon one in which women and girls ar reduced to and primarily valued for their appearance and, to a greater extent specifically, their ability to conform to societys increasingly peg down patterns for a k forthwithledgeablely desirable automobile t runk. Thus, the experience of versed objectification can be twain leave (e.g., women and girls personal experiences of being judged on their appearance and inner desirability) as head as indirect (i.e., women and girls observation of the treatment and sexual objectification of other women and girls) (Crawford et al., 2009).A moment of feminist theorists (e.g., Kaschak, 1992 Ussher, 1989) induct argued that one of the umpteen potential consequences of living in a society of pervasive sexual objectification, girls and women will internalize this sexual objectification and begin to objectify themselves. That is, over fourth dimension women learn, by both their interpersonal experiences and vicarious observation of society and usual culture, that their watchs matter, that other peoples appraisal of their appearance can prepargon how they be treated, and, these evaluations can eve affect the quality of their social and economic lives.Objectification theory (Fredrickson Roberts, 1997) is a manikin for understanding a pattern of psychological and physical consequences women whitethorn face as a result of living in a culture that sexually objectifies their bodies. This theory describes the process with which women internalize both the belief that appearance is critical component of womens worth as salutary as cultures standards of near physical perfection and then ultimately determine their value as an individual based on their ability to find out these standards (Crawford et al., 2009). However, as each successive cohort of women since the late 1950s has face standards of thinness and beaut that are increasingly more demanding to extend to (Garner et al., 1980 Wiseman et al., 1992), the received cultural clay and appearance standards for women are now both incredibly unhealthy as soundly as virtually undoable (Sptizer, Henderson, Zivian, 1999). For those women who connect these standards to their identity and self-worth, the offendur e to achieve or compare to this regard female dead soundbox is apparent to result in feelings of shame and mention to the highest degree their bodies (Bartky, 1988 Lewis, 2000). The traditional view of self-objectification (i.e., valuing ones organic structure more on the arse of outward appearance than performance, health, or function), in turn, is theorized to be associated with an array of mad and physical consequences, including an increase in automobile trunk shame, body dissatisfaction, decreased cognizance of internal states, natural depression, sexual dysfunction, and symptoms of consume disorders (Noll Fredrickson, 1998).In the literature, the thought of self-objectification has been apply interchangeably with the term objectified body consciousness. McKinley and Hydes (1996) similar construct of objectified body consciousness consists of trey primary components Self-surveillance, body shame, and appearance chair. An individual with an objectified body con sciousness closely monitors their body from the view of a third person, exhibits body shame when they fail to achieve the cultural expectations, and believes that individuals are able to control their appearance, respectively.Over the further some decade, a considerable body of evidence has been attested in fight down of the proposed tenets of these theories among both crowing and jejune women within a variety of contexts (for an coarse review Moradi Huang, 2008). Self-objectification and objectified body consciousness pretend been empirically linked to a plethora of negative psychosocial and physical outcomes, including low body esteem (McKinley, 1998, 1999 McKinley Hyde, 1996 Noll Fredrickson, 1998), depression (Harrison Frederickson, 2003 Miner-Rubino, Twenge, Fredrickson, 2002 Muehlenkamp Saris-Baglama, 2002 Tolman et al., 2006), restrictive ingest and eating disorders (Fredrickson et al., 1998 McKinley, 1999 Muehlenkamp Saris-Baglama, 2002 Noll Fredrickson, 1998 Slater Tiggemann, 2002 Tiggemann Lynch, 2001 Tiggemann Slater, 2001), sexual dysfunction (Roberts Gettman, 2004 Wiederman, 2001) and even an increased wish healthyliness of smoking cigarettes (Harrell, 2002). Additionally, experimental induction of temporary states of self-objectification has resulted in decreased performance, both physical and cognitive. In one study of over 200 girls, old 10 to 17 years, Frederickson and Harrison (2005) prepare that increasing levels of self-objectification predicted poorer force performance while throwing a softball. Additionally, in their now infamous study, Frederickson and colleagues (1998) pitch that after asking women to try on a swimsuit and tax their appearance in a mirror, these women performed worse on a absolutely math test compared to the women in the control group who completed the corresponding appearance evaluation task in a sweater findings which take a crap been pursuant(predicate)ly replicated a bollocks up sixf old sexes and sexual orientations (Hebl, King, Lin, 2004 Martins, Tiggemann, Kirkbride, 2007).To date, much of this enquiry has been conducted utilizing whatchamacallit samples of predominately U.S., undergraduate university students (e.g., Miner-Rubino et al., 2002 Morry Staska, 2001 Muelenkamp Saris-Baglama, 2002 Quinn, Kallen, Cathey, 2006) as nearly as other subgroups vulnerable to objectification, much(prenominal) as dancers (Parsons Betz, 2001 Slater Tiggemann, 2002 Tiggemann Slater, 2001) in part due to their high pass judgment of body dissatisfaction and eating disorders as well as the perceived akinlihood of these groups experiencing sexually objectifying situations. While these characteristics certainly disembowel these groups ideal for testing predictions based on objectification theory and the objectified body consciousness construct, they also mean that demographic qualities such as age range, socioeconomic status, and ethnicity are restricted in comparis on to the general population. This has greatly limited the generalizability of the findings to other groups of women and made it difficult to investigate studyal aspects of self-objectification. Furthermore, given the ubiquitous nature of the sexual objectification of women, self-objectification and an objectified body consciousness are likely to be relevant constructs in the lives of all women.This line of research is far from complete and prior studies and reviews have repeatedly called for additional research addressing group specific manifestations of self-objectification and its related concepts and outcomes within the frame lend of objectification theory. Despite the notion and evidence to elicit that eating and body public figure issues begin to develop prior to adolescence, from a informational perspective, preadolescent girls rest one group that has been understudied to this date.Puberty and AdolescenceOne potential reason for this elimination is due to the particular importance assigned to the contribution and timing of pubescence in the bring outnce of self-objectification by both objectification theory as well as objectified body consciousness theory. Specifically, as girls physically and sexually develop into their mature bad forms, their bodies are increasingly judged and commented upon, and subjected to sexual objectification from others, which, according to objectification theory, results in girls adopting a outsiders view of their own bodies to ensure compliance with the social standard (Fredrickson Roberts, 1997). Although in that respect is considerable variation in the individual timing and tempo of pubescence (Tanner, 1972), research in the related, albeit more general, areas of body mountain chain and body dissatisfaction have routinely shown puberty to be an important risk compute for a variety of psychosocial problems in adolescence, including depression and eating disorders (Angold, Costello, Worthman, 1998 Stice, Agras, Hammer, 1999 Weichold, Silbereisen, Schmitt-Rodermund, 2003).This work in the areas of body externalize and body dissatisfaction suggests three primary authoritys in which physical development during puberty could result in body shame. First, the switchnate of puberty initiates a series of dramatic appearance related changes for most adolescents. For example, normal female pubertal development involves the addition of approximately 24 pounds of body generative (Warren, 1983) which represents a typical change in body fat composition from about 16% to 27% and a muscle-to-fat harmoniseality of 5 to 4 by the end of puberty (Brown et al., 2010 Smoll Schutz, 1990).This lean pass and increase in body fat is entirely inconsistent with the current social ideal of an ultra thin, prepubertal, female body ideal and a likely source of adolescent girls dissatisfaction with their bodies (Graber et al., 1994 Spitzer, Henderson, Zivian, 1999 Stice Whitenton, 2002). Similarly, all of t hese sudden physical changes whitethorn redirect or enhance adolescents already greater tendency toward inquietude (Jones, 2004 Rankin et al., 2004). Some of the previously described body image research with adults supports this concept and has shown that directing individuals forethought to their physical appearance, even temporarily, can result in increased reports of self-surveillance as well as body shame (e.g., Fredrickson et al., 1998 Hebl, King, Lin, 2004 Martins, Tiggemann, Kirkbride, 2007). Finally, in addition to directing adolescents attention to their own physical appearance, the physical changes of puberty likely direct others attention to the adolescents body as well attention that is commonly in the form of peer sexual harassment, especially for first develop girls (American friendship of University Women, 2001). A growing body of research suggests that sexual harassment during adolescence is normative and related to pubertal development (McMaster et al., 2002 Murnen Smolak, 2000). Likewise, in a study of 166 girls aged 10- to 12-years-old (mean age 11.2 years), Lindberg, Grabe, Hyde (2007) showed that more advanced pubertal development and greater sexual harassment from peers predicted increases in both girls engagement in self-surveillance as well as body shame.Consequently, much of the research on the tenets of self-objectification and objectified body consciousness, as well as the proposed psychosocial outcomes has foc aimd on the experiences of broadly speaking post pubertal adolescents and unexampled adults. However, disdain the proposed role of puberty in the development of self-objectification research in related areas suggests that body image concerns are likely come to the foreing much earlier than puberty. Numerous researchers have documented that body image concerns and dissatisfaction are significant for most adolescent girls in both clinical and non clinical samples (Bunnell et al., 1992 Smolak Levine, 2001 Thompson et al., 1999b), regardless of eating pathology or incubus (Rodin, Silberstein, Streigel-Moore, 1985) findings which have subsequently been explained as normative discontent. In other words, because a majority of women tend to be dissatisfied with their bodies, negative body attitudes are, in fact, quite normal. Thus, by adolescence, many girls have already developed clog and body concerns and may even have engaged in attempts to alter or control their weight and body shape.Although a significant proportion of the previous research on unordered eating and body image dissatisfaction has focused on adult women and adolescent girls, an emerging line of research has begun to examine these constructs among pre-pubescent children as well (Cusumano and Thompson, 2001 Davison, Markey, Birch, 2003 Dohnt Tiggemann, 2004 Field et al., 1999a Ricciardelli McCabe, 2001 Ricciardelli, McCabe, Banfield, 2000 VanderWal Thelen, 2000). And thus, while the role of pubertal development is certain ly notable, it is also an incomplete picture of why and how self-objectification likely develops.Sexualization of GirlsA favourable perspective and emerging line of research particularly relevant to the potential causes and outcomes of self-objectification concerns that of the sexualization of girls. harmonize to the Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls (2007), sexualization is used to describe the treatment of others or oneself as sexual objects and, as things rather than as people with lawful sexual feelings of their own. Sexualized individuals are valued principally for their physical appearance and, more specifically, their sex appeal. The phenomenon of sexualization has been observed and commented upon by an ever widening array of academics and cultural critics, as well as the ordinary media. Emma chill and Andrea La Nauze of The Australia contribute (2006b) have similarly jelld sexualization as, the act of giving some one or something a sexual character, which, when applied to children includes inappropriately imposing or encouraging, sterile forms of adult sexual urge. In the book, The Lolita Effect, Gigi Durham (2008) commented at length on the complimentary social phenomenon of viewing and treating forgetful girls as sexy as well as encouraging adult women to be sexy by adopting wide-eyed habits and clothing trends (e.g., Mary Jane shoes, lol back talkops, school uniforms).While children have always been unfastened to adult sexuality finished popular culture and media, the very direct sexualization of children by media and society, is a considerably more recent development. According to Rush La Nauze (2006b), the term corporate paedophilia is a metaphor coined by Phillip Adams to describe the merchandiseing strategy of age compression, where previously adult/adolescent returns are aimed at young and younger children in order to plug more consumers (Lamb and Brown, 2006 Levin and Kilb ourne, 2008 Rush La Nauze, 2006a). Rush and La Nauze (2006b) operationally define this concept as advertising and marketing that either seek to present children in sexually suggestive ways, or seek to conduct product to children victimization overt forms of adult sexuality.Despite the potential negative connotations, with 27 million children aged 7 to 14 years, the contemporaneous tween market is a rather lucrative demographic with tremendous discretionary purchasing power, including a subset of 2.7 million that, in 2001, spent more than $14 billion on clothing alone (Nieder and Figueroa, 2001). Although both girls and boys are exposed to adult sexuality through popular culture and media, the direct marketing of sexualized materials to children is notably say toward young girls (Rush La Nauze, 2006b). A 1999 article in Entrepreneur powder magazine described how girls represent a better niche market than boys because, like their adult female counterparts, girls tend to purchase predictable economic stuff, including clothing, accessories, and beauty products (Phillipps, 1999). And, in 2007, NPD Group account that 7- to 14-year-old girls spent $11.5 billion on apparel, up from $10.5 billion in 2004 (Sweeney, 2008). Taking notice, corporations like MGA Entertainment, producer of the Bratz dolls, have clear a line of Bratz clothing and accessories for little girls that include a interconnected hip-hugger underpants and padded bra set (Opplinger, 2008). Slim-fit t-shirts in stretchy fabrics are now sold in childrens sizes with slogans such as, So many boys, so little time and, Scratch and Sniff across the chest and Pollett and Hurwitz (2004) noted that cilium underwear are now offered in tween stores as well as childrens wear departments, often with decorations that will specifically appeal to children. Retail stores such as Limited Too and Justice, which cater exclusively to the tween demographic sell lingerie items such as camisoles and lacy panties, ite ms that once would have been marketed only when to adults (Lamb Brown, 2006). Likewise, the younger sister of Miley Cyrus (of Disney Channel fame) recently began marketing her own lingerie line for tweens. National chains such as Target and J.C. cent are now selling padded bras and thong panties for young girls that induce cherries and slogans such as Wink-Wink and Eye Candy, while in 2008, Wal-Mart offered a duad of thong underwear in childrens sizes emblazoned with the phrase, Who needs a credit circuit board? Not to be left out, pink baby bibs sold at that same chain bore such phrases as, Always Dress to Impress, Kisses 25, and Drama Queen.The cosmetics industry has also seen the value of marketing their products to younger and younger girls. In 2001, a survey by the NPD Group showed that, on average, women began apply beauty products at 17. Today, the average is 13, and even this is likely to be an overstatement. According to the same report, 8- to 12-year-olds were already spending more than $40 million a month on beauty products. In 2003, according to Experian, a market research company based in New York, 43% of 6- to 9-year-olds were already using lip rouge or lip g prejudice 38% used hairstyling products and 12% used other cosmetics. In a study subsist year, 55% of 6- to 9-year-old girls said they used lip gloss or lipstick and nearly two-thirds said they used nail polish. From 2007 to 2009, the luck of girls ages 8- to 12-years-old, who regularly use mascara and eyeliner nearly doubled to 18% from 10% for mascara, and to 15% from 9% for eyeliner. The percentage of girls using lipstick also rose, to 15% from 10% (Quenqua, 2010).Of serious concern within the medical community is research that suggests some of these products may have highly negative consequences from prolonged usage, particularly for children and pre-pubertal adolescents. While race, obesity, and genetics are likely determinants of pubertal timing, a growing body of research sugg ests that hormonally diligent environmental agents may also alter the course of pubertal development in girls, which is controlled by endogenous steroids and gonadotropins (Jacobson-Dickman Lee, 2009 Rasier et al., 2006). Some of these chemicals include a issue of phenols and phthalates, such as Bisphenol A (BPA), which act like estradiol as hormone agonists and, in animals, have been shown to accelerate pubertal development (Rasier et al., 2006). In the previously described study examining early onset puberty among 7- to 8-year-old girls, Wolff and colleagues (2010) find elevated exposure to endocrine disruptors that are commonly make up in nail polishes and other cosmetics.Toy shops now sell items such as the Girls Ultimate Spa and Perfume Kit (for use by up to eight kids and perfect for spa parties, sleepovers, and rainy days) the Body Shop has lip glosses intended for teens and fruity lip glosses for preteens Claires, an accessory store in virtually every shopping mall, of fers lip gloss in flavors that appeal primarily to young girls (e.g., Dr Pepper, Skittles). Mattel Corporation, producer of Barbie dolls, offers lip glosses and perfumes to their junior consumers with names such as, freehanded Spirit, Summer Fun, and Super Model (Opplinger, 2008). Similarly, large spa chains and salons now offer a variety of go for children, including several companies devoted to providing run to child customers exclusively. Sweet Sassy salons and Dashing Diva franchises advertise services for girls 5- to 11-years-old and offer options such as virgin Cosmos in martini provide and pink limos as part of birthday parties for groups of girls. Similarly, at any of the 90 mall-based, Club Libby Lu stores nationwide, girls can mix their own lip gloss and partake in celebrity makeovers and mini fashion shoots (one of the most popular being Hannah Montana) (Sweeney, 2008).Products and services such as these highlight just how mainstream it has baffle to turn children i nto cute and sexy little objects. And, although adults and much of society have become somewhat desensitized to this sexualization of girls, children remain especially vulnerable to marketers efforts because of the very way they think. Under the age of eight, children have trouble understanding that the purpose of an ad is to get them to buy something and if they see a child smiling and feel happy, they are unlikely realize its because the child is being paid to guess that way. Young children tend to believe what they see, so that when other children are presented as both sexualized and happy, they believe it will be that way for them too (Oates, Blades, Gunter, 2002 vocaliser Revenson, 1996).Young childrens thinking tends to focus on one thing at a time and only on what they can see. They dont consider multiple aspects of a situation or the relationships amidst those aspects and they tend not to look at what lies beneath the surface of objects, images, and actions such as th e motives, intentions, and feelings underlying sexual behavior Singer Revenson, 1996). In other words, children are already dispose to attend to appearance and this is particularly damaging and problematic to children and adolescents who are developing their sense of themselves as sexual beings (APA, 2007). Ultimately, girls are encouraged to construct a sexy appearance, yet it is highly unlikely they personally understand what it nitty-gritty to be sexual or to have sexual desires (APA, 2007). Strasburger and Wilson (2002) argued that preadolescents and adolescents are like actors who experiment with different features of their newly forming identities a plasticity which may make them especially susceptible to media and cultural messages linking social popularity and acceptance with various sexualized products and services. addicted the tendency for adult women to internalize and actively pursue these social ideals despite greater cognitive resources and media/marketing literacy , it is likely that young girls would also start to adopt an observers view of their bodies and an increased focus on appearance over time and particularly with increased interaction with and consumption of culture that promotes this ideal. sort of simply, surrounded by padded bras, adult fashions in youth sizes, make-up and accessories, girls are no longer living in a world where puberty is the true beginning of their sexual objectification by others. Thus, it stands to reason that given generous exposure to this appearance culture, some girls may internalize these values at early ages than previously theorized.Body Image and Concerns in ChildhoodAlthough the work is limited, as compared to studies with adults, body image research with children suggests that children as young as 3-years-old may start to show an awareness and even mild minute of popular social attitudes about bodies, most notably anti-fat bias and a preference for thinness (Cramer Steinwert, 1998 Musher-Eizenma n et al., 2003). However, while mensural, research with young children is generally understand with great caution due to their limited cognitive development and generally studies show support for greater awareness and endorsement of these beliefs and preferences beginning between the ages of 5- and 6-years-old (Cramer Steinwert, 1998 Davison, Markey Birch, 2000 Lowes Tiggemann, 2003 Musher-Eizenman et al., 2003 Thelan et al., 1992 Tiggemann Wilson-Barrett, 1998).Because research with children is generally limited by their language and reading skills, most studies on weight and body image have relied primarily on a variety of verbal preference and adjective attribution tasks using age and sex specific figure arrays (Collins, 1991 Hill, Oliver, Roger, 1992 Gardner, Sorter, Friedman, 1997 Musher-Eizenman et al., 2003 Stager Burke, 1982 Truby Paxton, 2002 Williamson Delin, 2001) while reserving surveys and questionnaires for senior children (Flanneryschroeder Chrisler, 1996 ). Unfortunately, a thorough understanding of weight and body image concerns in children is also limited by the great variety in true constructs being measured (e.g., anti-fat bias, preference for thinness, body dissatisfaction, weight concerns, dieting) as well as differences in the age ranges of the child participants (Smolak, 2004). Despite these limitations, results from several studies suggest that childrens reports of weight and body concerns range between 37% and 50% for girls aged 8- to 13-years-old (Collins, 1991 Field et al., 1999a Rolland, Farnill, Griffiths, 1997 Schur, Sanders, Steiner, 2000 Schreiber et al., 1996) and a 1998 review by Smolak, Levine, and Schermer (1998) found that an average of 40% of girls in late elementary school reported weight and body image concerns.In addition to simply being present and measurable at these ages, weight and body image concerns also appear to be rather consistent and predictive over time. In a longitudinal study of 182 girls, Davison, Markey, and Birch (2003) found that girls were consistent with regard to their reported weight and body concerns from 5- to 9-years-old. Furthermore, even after statistically controlling for weight, girls who reported higher(prenominal) weight or body image concerns between the ages of 5- and 7-years-old also reported higher rates of dietary restriction, disordered eating attitudes, and dieting at age 9 (Davison, Markey, Birch, 2003).Research on the relationships between childrens weight and body image concerns to dieting mirrors patterns in similar studies with adults (Feldman, Feldman, Goodman, 1998 Flanneryschroeder Chrisler, 1996 Freedman, 1984 Gilbert, 1998 Wardle Marsland, 1990) as in adult women. Although dieting behaviors are more commonly reported by elder children ranging from 8- to 13-years-old (Rolland, Farnill, Griffiths, 1996 Thelen et al., 1992), there is evidence to suggest elementary school children (grades 3 through 6) are not only knowledgeable abou t weight loss methods (Schur, Sanders, Steiner, 2000), but they may be reliable reporters of dieting behaviors as well (Kostanski Gullone, 1999). Thus, while weight and body image concerns are perhaps more obvious during adolescence (Striegel-Moore, Silberstein, Rodin, 1986), their origins are likely found in childhood, as by middle childhood, weight and body image concerns are already normative among girls.Contributing FactorsAn overwhelming number of studies with adolescents and adult women point to a variety of sociocultural factors, most notably family, peers, and media, as the primary source of enamor in the development of poor body image and disordered eating (Stice, 1994, 2001, 2002 Stice Shaw, 1994 Thompson et al., 1999b Thompson Stice, 2001 van den Berg et al., 2002). The basic premise of these models is quite consistent with both objectification theory and the construct of objectified body consciousness and addresses a number of relevant constructs from Social Compar ison Theory (Festinger, 1954) while ultimately management on internalization of the thin ideal. In general, these theories posit weight and body image concerns develop as a result of discrepancies between the factual and ideal self resulting from social comparisons and feedback from family, peers, and media. As the previously discussed sexualization material suggests, children are likely no less subject to societal pressures than adults and adolescent and sociocultural models have now been adapted to explain the development of childrens weight and body concerns (Ricciardelli et al., 2003 Smolak Levine, 2001).MothersGiven the pivotal role of families, more specifically mothers, in young childrens lives, it is perhaps not surprising that much of the sociocultural research on the development of weight and body concerns in childhood has focused on the potential role parents (e.g., Davison, Markey, Birch, 2000 Hill Pallin, 1998 Kluck 2010 Lowes Tiggemann, 2003 McCabe et al., 2007 R icciardelli et al., 2003 Smolak, Levine, Schermer, 1999). Despite many changes in contemporary culture and across a wide variety of developmental theories, families systematically remain important social reinforcers and role models often credited with constructing and maintaining environments that trance childrens beliefs and behaviors, not only during childhood and adolescence but across the lifespan as well (Bandura McDonald, 1963 Killeya-Jones et al., 2007 Parke Buriel, 2008).With specific regard to self-objectification and objectified body consciousness, McKinley (1999) found significant decreed correlations between mothers and their late adolescent daughters body surveillance, body esteem, BMI, and desired weight. Similarly, in a cross cultural study of objectified body consciousness, Crawford and colleagues (2009) found that body shame in mothers was related to body shame in adult daughters for a Nepali sample. With regard to related body image and dietary constructs, nu merous studies have identified similarities between mothers and daughters body image concerns and disordered eating patterns (Evans le Grange, 1995 Hill Franklin, 1998 Hill, Weaver, Blundell, 1990 Kichler Crowther, 2001 Rieves Cash, 1996 Sanftner et al., 1996 Smolak, Levine, Schermer, 1999).One way researchers have suggested that a mothers physical appearance orientation can negatively influence daughters is through modeling of behaviors such as dieting or disordered eating (e.g., Keel, Heatherton, Harnden, Hornig, 1997 Kichler Crowther, 2001 Pike, 1995 Pike and Rodin, 1991). Although much of this research has focused on adolescents, similar results emerge in studies of younger children (e.g., Abramovity Birch, 2000 Stice, Agras, Hammer, 1999 Williamson Delin, 2001). Interestingly, in a sample of 5- to 10-year old girls, Williamson and Delin (2001) found it was mothers weight concerns rather than the childs actual weight that predicted childrens weight concerns. Similarly , Abramovity and Birch (2000) found a sample of 5-year-old girls were twice as likely to report ideas about dieting if their mothers were dieting.Yet another way researcher have suggested that a mothers appearance orientation can negatively influence daughters body image and eating behaviors in a more direct manner through verbal comments, which range in form from criticism (Hahn-Smith and Smith, 2001 Smolak, Levine, Schermer, 1999) to teasing and fat talk (Nichter, 2000 Schwartz et al., 1999), and even encouraging to diet (Benedikt, Wertheim, Love, 1998) phenomena which appear to increase as girls approach adolescence (Striegel-Moore Kearney-Cooke, 1994 Thelen Cormier, 1995). However, while most studies have found strong electropositive relationships between daughters and their mothers self-reports of weight and body image concerns among late adolescents and adults, several notably inconsistent exceptions exist, particularly in studies of younger girls. In the previously menti oned cross cultural study (Crawford et al., 2009), none of the objectified body consciousness measures correlated between mothers and their late adolescent daughters in the US sample, and in the previously mentioned McKinley (1999) study, there were no relationships between mothers and daughters scores for body shame or control beliefs. Likewise, Lindberg, Hyde, and McKinley (2006) did not find any positive associations between mothers and their 10 to 12-year-old daughters objectified body consciousness measures, and in fact, found small negative correlations between mothers and daughters surveillanc

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.