↓ Skip to main content

Implicit beliefs about ideal body image predict body image dissatisfaction

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Implicit beliefs about ideal body image predict body image dissatisfaction
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01402
Pubmed ID
Authors

Niclas Heider, Adriaan Spruyt, Jan De Houwer

Abstract

We examined whether implicit measures of actual and ideal body image can be used to predict body dissatisfaction in young female adults. Participants completed two Implicit Relational Assessment Procedures (IRAPs) to examine their implicit beliefs concerning actual (e.g., I am thin) and desired ideal body image (e.g., I want to be thin). Body dissatisfaction was examined via self-report questionnaires and rating scales. As expected, differences in body dissatisfaction exerted a differential influence on the two IRAP scores. Specifically, the implicit belief that one is thin was lower in participants who exhibited a high degree of body dissatisfaction than in participants who exhibited a low degree of body dissatisfaction. In contrast, the implicit desire to be thin (i.e., thin ideal body image) was stronger in participants who exhibited a high level of body dissatisfaction than in participants who were less dissatisfied with their body. Adding further weight to the idea that both IRAP measures captured different underlying constructs, we also observed that they correlated differently with body mass index, explicit body dissatisfaction, and explicit measures of actual and ideal body image. More generally, these findings underscore the advantage of using implicit measures that incorporate relational information relative to implicit measures that allow for an assessment of associative relations only.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Israel 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 107 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 14%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Student > Master 12 11%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 35 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 49 45%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 6%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 2%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 35 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 October 2020.
All research outputs
#2,880,515
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,430
of 29,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,539
of 278,190 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#104
of 531 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,819 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 278,190 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 531 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.