Body dissatisfaction. In order to measure body dissatisfaction (difference between actual and ideal figure) and internalization of the ideal thin figure (defined as the selection of a thin silhouette from a group of silhouettes of various body sizes), a set of 10 silhouettes assumed to be neutral to ethnicity, culture, and details (Figure 1) was used. A German work group (Jaeger, Massoubre & Lamprecht, 2000) originally developed these for a previous multi-cross-cultural study in a three-stage peer revision procedure. Four questions were asked in relation to the silhouette scales: “Please mark with a cross the silhouette that best represents the current shape of your body”; “What do you wish you looked like?”; “What is the most attractive silhouette in your opinion?”; “What do you find the most attractive silhouette in the opposite sex?” Participants were asked to mark with a cross the position representing their attitudes on a 0-10 decimal scale (Figure 1); positions between the two silhouettes were allowed and coded as real numbers. tt= 0.82 (“actual”); Rtt= 0.77 (“ideal”); Rtt= 0.71 (“attractive”); and those of convergent validity as: Rcit= 0.73 (“actual” and BMI). The procedures followed by the authors, as well as the psychometric features, are described in detail elsewhere (Jaeger et al., 2002; Jaeger et al., 2000).
Fat reduction discipline are counted of the Weight loss Scale of the Eating Attitudes Attempt (EAT) (Gather, Olmsted, Bohr & Garfinkel, 1982), made up of 16 statements scored on a good six-point measure (never ever = 0/constantly = 5), having higher scores exhibiting an advanced level out of controlled restaurants. On Consume psychometrical features pick Garner mais aussi al. (1982). The surface coefficient both for trials, brand new North american country and you may German of these, is of the same worth, a leader regarding 0.76.
Weight-loss restraint
Ineffectiveness size. The fresh new negative affect factor was estimated from the Ineffectiveness Size of the latest Eating Problems Inventory (EDI) (Gather mais aussi al., 1983), that has shown an effective convergent legitimacy (ineffectiveness/self confidence ) out of R = 0.70 (p
Scientific employees took the extra weight and height measures
Bmi (BMI). Bmi was determined as lbs in kilograms split up of the top when you look at the rectangular m (Bmi = kg/m2).
Just before study collection, a pilot study of this new Silhouettes Scale (Shape 1), put on a sample comprising 20 https://kissbrides.com/es/novias-colombianas/ Mexican children, was used to evaluate brand new appropriateness of the rates so you can portray muscles systems, in order to corroborate a beneficial acceptation off an unknown group of silhouettes and you can a very clear knowledge of brand new advice (this new German class currently measured which have investigation within this respect). The results demonstrated the latest Shape Scale are good or an enthusiastic suitable tool to your North american country test.
The investigators of these two nations, at the Mexico Urban area as well as Hae (standardized) procedure. The latest surveys were applied to sets of medical and you will nursing youngsters on Mexican and you may German colleges. A primary reason trailing the fresh new ples away from pupils related to medication is precisely the focus that (it’s possible to assume) such teenagers need to the scientific community and also for health conditions, making them a great deal more tuned in to difficulties such ED. Informed consent try taken from all of the research participants. Every called college students provided to take part. The fresh new particular local stability committees recognized this new non-invasive processes. Elite group translators undertook and you can managed brand new interpretation and you will retranslation of products.
Age. The mean age of Mexican women (Mage = 20.4, SD = 0.49) and German women (Mage = 20.8, SD = 1.0) differed statistically: t(346)= 4.29, p = 0.000. It is important to note that we expected not to find a significant difference in this variable, but a minimal difference of a few tenths (0.4) resulted in a significant one, most likely due to the large size of the total sample, since in separate structural analysis, age accounted for