Features of objectified body consciousness and sociocultural perspectives as risk factors for disordered eating among late-adolescent women and men.

Abstract

Body surveillance and body shame are features of objectified body consciousness (OBC) that have been linked to disordered eating, yet the evidence base is largely cross-sectional and limited to samples in certain Western countries. Furthermore, it is not clear whether these factors contribute to the prediction of eating disturbances independent of conceptually related risk factors emphasized within other sociocultural accounts. In this prospective study, body surveillance, body shame, and features of complementary sociocultural models (i.e., perceived appearance pressure from mass media and close interpersonal networks, appearance social comparisons, negative affect, body dissatisfaction) were assessed as risk factors for and concomitants of eating disturbances over time. University-age, mainland Chinese women (n = 2144) and men (n = 1017) completed validated measures of eating-disorder pathology and hypothesized risk factors at baseline (T1) and 1-year follow-up (T2). Among women, elevations on T1 measures of sociocultural-model features predicted more T2 eating disturbances, independent of T1 disturbances. After controlling for other T1 predictors, body surveillance and shame made modest unique contributions to the model. Finally, heightened T2 body dissatisfaction, media, and interpersonal appearance pressure, negative affect, and body shame predicted concomitant increases in T2 eating concerns. For men, T1 features of sociocultural accounts (negative affect, body dissatisfaction) but not OBC predicted T2 eating disturbances, along with attendant elevations in T2 negative affect, interpersonal appearance pressure, and body shame. Implications are discussed for theory and intervention that target disordered eating.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 87 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.