Body Image 9 (2012) 43–49

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Body Image
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/bodyimage

Explaining the relation between thin ideal internalization and body

dissatisfaction among college women: The roles of social comparison and body
surveillance
Ellen E. Fitzsimmons-Craft, Megan B. Harney, Laura G. Koehler, Lauren E. Danzi, Margaret K. Riddell,
Anna M. Bardone-Cone ∗
Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Sociocultural models of disordered eating lack comprehensive explanations as to how thin ideal inter-
Received 31 May 2011 nalization leads to body dissatisfaction. This study examined two social psychological theories as
Received in revised form 6 September 2011 explanations of this relation, namely social comparison and objectification theories, in a sample of 265
Accepted 7 September 2011
women attending a Southeastern university. Social comparison (both general and appearance-related)
and body surveillance (the indicator of objectification) were tested as mediators of the relation between
Keywords:
thin ideal internalization and body dissatisfaction using bootstrapping analyses. Results indicated that
Social comparison
body surveillance was a significant specific mediator of this relation; however, neither operationalization
Objectification
Body surveillance
of social comparison emerged as such. Results serve to elaborate upon the sociocultural model of dis-
Thin ideal internalization ordered eating by providing a more comprehensive understanding of the processes by which thin ideal
Body dissatisfaction internalization manifests itself in body dissatisfaction. The current findings also highlight the importance
Sociocultural model of targeting body surveillance in clinical settings.
© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction Rodin, 1988; Spitzer, Henderson, & Zivian, 1999; Vohs, Heatherton,
& Herrin, 2001).
In university settings, the statistics regarding eating disorder Research has found support for a sociocultural model of dis-
prevalence are alarming, as between 4% and 9% or more of col- ordered eating among college women (e.g., Stice, 1994; Stice,
lege women suffer from diagnosable eating disorders (Hesse-Biber, Nemeroff, & Shaw, 1996; Thompson, Heinberg, Altabe, & Tantleff-
Marino, & Watts-Roy, 1999; Keel, Heatherton, Dorer, Joiner, & Zalta, Dunn, 1999). According to this model, disordered eating is a result
2006; Pyle, Neuman, Halvorson, & Mitchell, 1991). When disor- of pressure for women in Western society (e.g., from media, family,
dered eating estimates for this group are broadened to include and peers) to achieve an ultraslender figure (Malkin, Wornian, &
subthreshold levels, prevalence ranges from 34% to 67% of college Chrisler, 1999; Striegel-Moore, Silberstein, & Rodin, 1986; Sypeck,
women (e.g., Berg, Frazier, & Sherr, 2009; Franko & Omori, 1999; Gray, & Ahrens, 2004). Indeed, Chernin (1981) described that a
Hoerr, Bokram, Lugo, Bivins, & Keast, 2002; Krahn, Kurth, Gomberg, “tyranny of slenderness” rules over women in the United States. For
& Drewnowski, 2005; Mintz & Betz, 1988; Mintz, O’Halloran, example, the media has espoused a viewpoint that the ultraslender
Mulholland, & Schneider, 1997), indicating that disordered eating is look is both desirable and achievable, when in fact, this “ideal” is
relatively “normative” for this group. Furthermore, body dissatis- very difficult or near impossible for most women to achieve without
faction, which has been described as one of the “most consistent engaging in extreme weight loss efforts (Brownell, 1991). Of course,
and robust risk and maintenance factors for eating pathology” for these sociocultural pressures to have harmful effects on an indi-
(Stice, 2002, pp. 832–833) has been reported at rates as high as 80% vidual, they must be internalized. If a woman does not “buy in” to
for college women (Heatherton, Nichols, Mahamedi, & Keel, 1995; such pressures, it is unlikely that they would lead to disordered eat-
Neighbors & Sobal, 2007; Silberstein, Striegel-Moore, Timko, & ing. However, if a woman does assimilate and internalize the thin
ideal and the values associated with it into her worldview (e.g., in
order to be considered attractive, I must be thin), it is likely that
this internalization will have negative consequences (Thompson,
van den Berg, Roehrig, Guarda, & Heinberg, 2004). For example,
∗ Corresponding author at: Department of Psychology, University of North Car-
research has indicated that those who most aspire to being thin are
olina at Chapel Hill, CB#3270-Davie Hall, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States.
Tel.: +1 919 962 5989.
the most negatively affected by thin ideal images (e.g., Dittmar &
E-mail address: [email protected] (A.M. Bardone-Cone). Howard, 2004; Halliwell & Dittmar, 2004).

1740-1445/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2011.09.002
44 E.E. Fitzsimmons-Craft et al. / Body Image 9 (2012) 43–49

Cross-sectional research has demonstrated a robust link et al., 2003). For example, Gilbert and Meyer (2003) found that the
between thin ideal internalization and body dissatisfaction, and general tendency to compare one’s performance with others was
prospective research has indicated that thin ideal internalization significantly correlated with body dissatisfaction in a sample of col-
predicts increased body dissatisfaction (e.g., Keery, van den Berg, lege women. Morrison et al. (2003) similarly found that socially
& Thompson, 2004; Shroff & Thompson, 2006; Stice & Whitenton, comparing one’s performance (as well as one’s opinions) with oth-
2002); body dissatisfaction is in turn is a strong predictor of dis- ers was significantly associated with body dissatisfaction among
ordered eating (e.g., Stice, 2002). However, sociocultural models university females.
of disordered eating (e.g., Stice, 1994; Stice et al., 1996) currently Overall, the relation between social comparison and body dis-
lack comprehensive explanations as to how thin ideal internaliza- satisfaction has been confirmed by meta-analytic work (Myers &
tion leads to body dissatisfaction. Theoretically, women who have Crowther, 2009). Further, research has indicated that internaliza-
internalized the thin ideal would be at risk for developing body tion of the thin ideal may spur social comparison processes as a
dissatisfaction when the ideal is not actualized; yet, how do these way for individuals to gain information regarding how they mea-
individuals come to know that they have not realized such an ideal sure up to that ideal (Harrison, 2001; Richins, 1991), which in turn,
– through what mechanisms does this occur? How does a woman may lead to dissatisfaction with the body (Engeln-Maddox, 2005;
come to know that there is a discrepancy between her ideal and Shaw & Waller, 1995). While one cross-sectional study has found
what she currently is? that social comparison behavior (specific to physical appearance)
In the present study, we investigated two social psycholog- mediated the relation between internalization of the thin ideal and
ical theories as explanations of the relation between thin ideal body dissatisfaction among preadolescent girls (Blowers, Loxton,
internalization and body dissatisfaction, namely social comparison Grady-Flesser, Occhipinti, & Dawe, 2003), to the authors’ knowl-
(Festinger, 1954) and objectification (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997; edge, such a mediation model has yet to be tested in a sample of
McKinley & Hyde, 1996) theories. Specifically, social comparison college women.
and body surveillance (i.e., the indicator of objectification; Moradi
& Huang, 2008) were examined as two important constructs that
may mediate the thin ideal internalization–body dissatisfaction
relation. Body Surveillance as a Mediator of the Thin Ideal
Internalization–Body Dissatisfaction Link
Social Comparison as a Mediator of the Thin Ideal
Internalization–Body Dissatisfaction Link Body surveillance, the indicator of objectification, may also
mediate the relation between thin ideal internalization and body
Festinger’s (1954) social comparison theory forwards that dissatisfaction. Objectification theory posits that within dominant
humans engage in social comparison with others in order to under- American culture, the feminine body has been constructed as an
stand how and where they fit into the world when objective object to be looked at and gazed upon; thus, girls and women
standards are not available. Comparing oneself to others, both learn to view themselves from an observer’s perspective and to
intentionally and unintentionally, is a pervasive aspect of social treat themselves as objects to be looked at (Fredrickson & Roberts,
interactions and has been described as a “core element of human 1997; McKinley & Hyde, 1996). In addition to being reduced to
conduct and experience” (Suls, Martin, & Wheeler, 2002, p. 159). the status of mere objects, women are given the message that
Further, college campuses provide environments that lend them- they have the ability to control their bodies and that given the
selves to engaging in social comparisons; specifically, women are appropriate amount of effort, it is possible to comply with cultural
surrounded by many other women of approximately the same age standards of beauty (i.e., the thin ideal; McKinley & Hyde, 1996).
with whom they interact with both directly (e.g., in class, room- The internalization of the “objectifying observer’s” (Fredrickson,
mate interactions) and indirectly (e.g., passing another woman on Roberts, Noll, Quinn, & Twenge, 1998) perspective of one’s own
campus) on a daily basis (Lindner, Hughes, & Fahy, 2008). body is known as self-objectification, which manifests itself in
Research has indicated that women frequently make the act of body surveillance (Moradi & Huang, 2008) – a behav-
appearance-related social comparisons (Leahey, Crowther, & ior that many women feel they must engage in constantly in
Mickelson, 2007), and one negative psychological consequence order to ensure their compliance with the thin ideal (Gilbert &
that may result when the comparison is unfavorable is body dis- Thompson, 1996; McKinley, 2004; Thompson & Stice, 2001). It is
satisfaction (e.g., Myers & Crowther, 2009; Trampe, Stapel, & Siero, via this surveillance that many women perceive there to be a dis-
2007). Indeed, comparisons made by women on appearance- crepancy between what they see and what they would ideally
related dimensions are generally upward (i.e., the individual like to look like, which often results in negative consequences,
compares themselves to someone they deem as more attrac- such as dissatisfaction with the body (McKinley & Hyde, 1996).
tive or “better off” in some area; Morrison, Kalin, & Morrison, Indeed, research has found that the development of body dissat-
2004). For example, research has indicated that the majority of isfaction can be partly explained by body surveillance (e.g., Knauss,
comparisons made by women in the naturalistic environment Paxton, & Alsaker, 2008; McKinley, 1998; Muehlenkamp, Swanson,
are in the upward direction (>80%; Leahey et al., 2007). Such & Brausch, 2005).
upward comparisons generally result in feelings of discontent and Harper and Tiggemann (2008) conceptualized objectification as
dissatisfaction (Thompson et al., 1999) because of the gap that is an outcome that may result from internalization of the ultraslender
created between one’s actual and ideal selves (Cash & Szymanski, ideal. It may be that women who have internalized the thin ideal
1995). For example, Rodgers, Paxton, and Chabrol (2009) found are compelled to engage in body monitoring as a way to assess
that a latent variable encompassing appearance-related social their standing relative to that ideal; when a woman comes to the
comparison behavior and thin ideal internalization was associ- realization that she does not measure up, discontent with her body
ated with greater body dissatisfaction among college women. may result. Indeed, Myers and Crowther (2007) found that the pro-
Similarly, Keery et al. (2004) found that the tendency to make cess of self-objectification mediated the relation between thin ideal
appearance-related comparisons was significantly associated with internalization and body dissatisfaction in a cross-sectional study
body dissatisfaction. of college women. Although these results indicate that having an
Research has indicated that general social comparison tenden- objectified perspective of oneself may be one mechanism by which
cies are associated with body dissatisfaction, as well (e.g., Morrison thin ideal internalization leads to body dissatisfaction, research has
 E.E. Fitzsimmons-Craft et al. / Body Image 9 (2012) 43–49 45

yet to investigate the behavioral indicator of self-objectification, Measures

body surveillance, as a mediator.
Demographics. Demographic data for age, parents’ highest lev-
The Current Study els of education attained, and race/ethnicity were collected via a
set of questionnaires created for this study.
In the present study, two social psychological theories, social Thin ideal internalization. Thin ideal internalization was
comparison theory and objectification theory, were investigated as measured with the Internalization-General subscale of the Socio-
explanations of the thin ideal internalization–body dissatisfaction cultural Attitudes Toward Appearance Questionnaire-3 (SATAQ-3;
relation. Specifically, social comparison and body surveillance, the Thompson et al., 2004). This subscale consists of nine items that
indicator of objectification, were tested as mediators of the rela- indicate endorsement and acceptance of media messages that
tion between thin ideal internalization and body dissatisfaction in espouse unrealistic ideals for female beauty and the striving toward
a sample of undergraduate women. We hypothesized that social such ideals. However, four of the nine items reference compari-
comparison and body surveillance would each partially mediate son (e.g., “I compare my body to the bodies of people who are on
this relation. Given that prior research has linked both general and TV”). In order to minimize issues related to construct overlap, these
appearance-related social comparison tendencies to body dissatis- four items were not included when computing the subscale score.
faction, we chose to examine social comparison in this study in two All analyses were run using the resulting 5-item version of the
ways (i.e., broadly and appearance-specific). SATAQ-3 Internalization-General subscale. An example of an item
Hesse-Biber, Leavy, Quinn, and Zoino (2006) conceptualized that was retained is, “I would like my body to look like the mod-
both social comparison theory and objectification theory as part els who appear in magazines.” These items are rated on a 5-point
of a “nexus of influence” (p. 208) that helps explain the devel- scale ranging from definitely disagree to definitely agree. Evidence of
opment and maintenance of women’s body image disturbance good construct validity has been demonstrated (e.g., relatively high
and other symptoms of disordered eating; however, to date, only correlation with drive for thinness; Calogero, Davis, & Thompson,
one known simultaneous examination of these two theoretical 2004; Thompson et al., 2004), and high internal consistency has
frameworks has been undertaken. Tylka and Sabik (2010) found been reported in two studies (alphas of .96 and .92; Thompson et al.,
that body comparison partially mediated the relation between 2004). In the current study, Cronbach’s alpha was .88 for the 5-item
body surveillance and body shame in a sample of college women. version of the SATAQ-3 Internalization-General subscale.
These researchers also found that body comparison moderated the Social comparison. Social comparison behavior was measured
relation between body surveillance and disordered eating; in par- using the Iowa-Netherlands Comparison Orientation Measure
ticular, results indicated that at high levels of body surveillance, (INCOM; Gibbons & Buunk, 1999). This scale consists of eleven
women who also reported high levels of body comparison reported items that are rated on a 5-point scale ranging from disagree strongly
much greater levels of eating disorder symptomatology than those to agree strongly, with higher scores indicating a greater tendency
who reported low levels of body comparison. Research has yet to to engage in social comparisons across life domains. An example
examine these two theoretical frameworks as explanations of the item is, “If I want to find out how well I have done something,
thin ideal internalization–body dissatisfaction relation. Examining I compare what I have done with how others have done.” Evi-
these meditational relations and incorporating this information dence of construct validity is suggested by the measure’s significant
into an elaborated sociocultural model would provide researchers relationships with neuroticism, self-monitoring, public and private
with a more comprehensive understanding of the social psycholog- self-consciousness, and social anxiety (Gibbons & Buunk, 1999).
ical processes by which thin ideal internalization manifests itself in Gibbons and Buunk (1999) found that estimates of internal con-
body dissatisfaction. sistency ranged from .78 to .85; in the present study, alpha was
.82.
Appearance-related social comparison tendencies were
Method
assessed using the Physical Appearance Comparison Scale (PACS;
Thompson, Heinberg, & Tantleff, 1991). This scale assesses an
Participants
individual’s tendency to compare her own appearance to the
appearance of others and consists of five items that are rated
Participants were 265 women attending a Southeastern uni-
on a 5-point scale ranging from never to always. An example
versity; they ranged in age from 17 to 27 years, with a mean
item is, “At parties or other social events, I compare my physical
age of 19.12 years (SD = 1.46). Recruitment occurred through intro-
appearance to the physical appearance of others.” Construct
ductory psychology courses and other psychology courses. Most
validity is demonstrated by the strong correlations between the
women (66.0%) identified themselves as Caucasian, 17.0% as
PACS and measures of body dissatisfaction and eating disturbance
African American or African, 6.4% as Asian, 1.9% as Hispanic,
(Thompson et al., 1991). Thompson et al. (1991) found adequate
1.1% as Native American, 7.2% as biracial/biethnic, and 0.4% as
internal consistency (coefficient alpha = .78) in a sample of college
other races/ethnicities. Highest parental education was used as
women; in the present study, alpha was .82.
a proxy for socioeconomic status and ranged from 7 to 21 years
Body surveillance. Body surveillance behavior was measured
(M = 16.45 years, SD = 2.63).
with the Body Surveillance subscale of the Objectified Body Con-
sciousness Scale (OBCS; McKinley & Hyde, 1996). This subscale
Procedures consists of eight items that are rated on an 7-point scale ranging
from strongly disagree to strongly agree, with higher scores indi-
Participants completed a set of computer-based questionnaires cating higher levels of surveillance or habitual body monitoring
in a research laboratory as part of a study presented as an investiga- and thinking of one’s body in terms of how it looks rather than
tion of personality and cognition. Questionnaires were presented in how one feels. An example item is, “During the day, I think about
a fixed order and were administered to participants in a quiet room how I look many times.” This subscale contains one comparison-
after obtaining written consent. Study completion took 45 minutes related item (i.e., “I rarely compare how I look with how other
to one hour, and participants received course credit for their people look”); in order to minimize issues related to construct
involvement. This study was reviewed and approved by the uni- overlap, this item was not included when computing the subscale
versity’s Institutional Review Board. score. All analyses were run using the 7-item version of the OBCS
46 E.E. Fitzsimmons-Craft et al. / Body Image 9 (2012) 43–49

Table 1
Correlations among and means and standard deviations of the measured variables (N = 265).

1 2 3 4 5

1. SATAQ-3, Internalization – M = 15.24, SD = 5.27

2. INCOM .29*** – M = 40.23, SD = 6.44
3. PACS .58*** .53*** – M = 15.40, SD = 3.85
4. OBCS, Surveillance .57*** .38*** .60*** – M = 4.64, SD = 1.00
5. EDI-BD .43*** .17** .37*** .46*** – M = 30.51, SD = 8.78

Note. SATAQ-3 = Sociocultural Attitudes Toward Appearance Questionnaire-3. INCOM = Iowa-Netherlands Comparison Orientation Measure. PACS = Physical Appearance
Comparison Scale. OBCS = Objectified Body Consciousness Scale. EDI-BD = Eating Disorder Inventory-Body Dissatisfaction. Possible ranges for the study variables are as
follows: SATAQ-3, Internalization (5–25), INCOM (11–55), PACS (5–25), OBCS, Surveillance (1–7), and EDI-BD (9–54).
**
p < .01.
***
p < .001.

Body Surveillance score. Also of note, if more than two items are Results
missing on an OBCS subscale (with a “not applicable” option being
counted as missing), then the score for that subscale is not com- Descriptive Statistics
puted (McKinley & Hyde, 1996). Only one study participant had
more than two items missing on the Body Surveillance subscale and Means and standard deviations for the study variables and their
thus a score for this subscale was not computed for this individual. correlations are presented in Table 1. Correlations were in the direc-
Construct validity is demonstrated by high correlations with public tions expected based on the literature; that is, we found positive
self-consciousness (r = .73) and non-significant relations with pri- correlations between all measured variables. However, the corre-
vate self-consciousness (McKinley & Hyde, 1996). McKinley and lation between the general measure of social comparison and body
Hyde (1996) reported a coefficient alpha of .89 in a sample of stu- dissatisfaction (r = .17, p = .005) was less strong than was expected.
dent and nonstudent women, and in the current study, alpha was
.80 for the 7-item version of the OBCS Body Surveillance subscale. Mediation Analyses
Body dissatisfaction. The 9-item Body Dissatisfaction subscale
of the Eating Disorder Inventory (EDI; Garner, Olmstead, & Polivy, When examining general social comparison and body surveil-
1983) was used to assess the belief that specific parts of the body are lance as mediators, the bootstrap results indicated that the total
too large (e.g., hips, thighs, buttocks). An example item is, “I think indirect effect of thin ideal internalization on body dissatisfaction
that my stomach is too big.” These items are rated on a 6-point scale through this set of mediators was significant, with a standard-
ranging from never to always, with higher scores indicating greater ized point estimate of 0.18 (p < .001) and a 95% BC (bias-corrected)
body dissatisfaction. Garner et al. (1983) originally recommended bootstrap confidence interval (CI) of 0.10–0.26. Thus, general social
that item responses never, rarely, and sometimes receive a score of comparison and body surveillance partially mediated the relation
0, and the responses often, usually, and always receive scores of between thin ideal internalization and body dissatisfaction. The
1, 2, and 3 respectively; however, because this reduces the vari- specific indirect effects of each mediator showed that body surveil-
ability in responses in nonclinical samples, like others, we coded lance was a unique and significant mediator, with a standardized
these responses using the continuous 6-point scale (see Tylka & point estimate of 0.19 (p < .001) and a 95% BC CI of 0.10–0.27. How-
Subich, 2004). Construct validity is demonstrated by the measure’s ever, general social comparison did not add significantly to the
high correlation with body preoccupation (Tylka & Subich, 2004) model, with a standardized point estimate of −0.01 (p = .674) and
and association with eating disordered behavior (Spillane, Boerner, a 95% BC CI of −0.05 to 0.03. A contrast confirmed that the indirect
Anderson, & Smith, 2004). Reliability coefficients for college women effect of body surveillance in the thin ideal internalization–body
range from .83 to .93 (Garner et al., 1983); in the current study, dissatisfaction relation was significantly stronger (p < .001) than the
alpha was .89. indirect effect of general social comparison (see Fig. 1 for the full
meditational model).
When examining appearance-related social comparison and
body surveillance as mediators, the bootstrap results indicated
Analytic Strategy that the total indirect effect of thin ideal internalization on body

In this study, bootstrapping analyses were conducted using

methods described by Preacher and Hayes (2008) for esti-
mating indirect effects with multiple mediators. This analytic General
.30*** Social -.03
procedure allows multiple mediators to be tested simultane- Comparison
ously, it does not assume a normal sampling distribution (of
note, this sampling distribution is normal only in very large
samples, and in general, indirect effects are rarely normal), .25**
Thin Ideal Body
and the number of inferential tests is minimized, resulting in Internalization Dissatisfaction
a reduced likelihood of Type I errors (MacKinnon, Lockwood,
& Williams, 2004; Preacher & Hayes, 2004, 2008; Shrout
& Bolger, 2002). Bootstrapping (using 5,000 resamples) was
used to obtain estimates of the indirect effects and to test .57*** Body .33***
their significance via confidence intervals. Additionally, con- Surveillance
trasts were utilized to examine whether the indirect effects
of the hypothesized mediators were equal in size. Mplus Ver-
Fig. 1. General social comparison and body surveillance as mediators of the relation
sion 5.21 (Muthén & Muthén, 2007) was used to run these between thin ideal internalization and body dissatisfaction. Path values represent
analyses. standardized regression coefficients. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
 E.E. Fitzsimmons-Craft et al. / Body Image 9 (2012) 43–49 47

Appearance- internalization and body dissatisfaction. Although research gener-

Related ally supports the theorized meditational role of social comparison
.58*** Social .05
in this relation (e.g., Blowers et al., 2003; Harrison, 2001; Myers
Comparison
& Crowther, 2009), it may have been that the general measure
of social comparison used in this study (i.e., the INCOM) was too
.23**
general and that the appearance-related social comparison mea-
Thin Ideal Body sure (i.e., the PACS) was too narrow. For example, other social
Internalization Dissatisfaction
comparison domains, such as those related to muscularity, eating,
and exercise, may stem from such internalization and lead to body
image disturbance. It may also be that social comparison does not
.57*** .30*** mediate the thin ideal internalization–body dissatisfaction relation
Body
Surveillance and/or that these constructs are associated with one another in
other ways. For example, as put forth by the Tripartite Influence
Model of body image and eating disturbance (e.g., Keery et al., 2004;
Fig. 2. Appearance-related social comparison and body surveillance as mediators of Shroff & Thompson, 2006), it may be that thin ideal internalization
the relation between thin ideal internalization and body dissatisfaction. Path values
represent standardized regression coefficients. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
mediates the relation between social comparison and body dissatis-
faction. In the future, researchers should use prospective data and
a more generative measure of social comparison to examine and
dissatisfaction through this set of mediators was significant, with
compare the Tripartite Influence Model and the model put forth
a standardized point estimate of 0.20 (p < .001) and a 95% BC CI
in the current study to better understand the temporal ordering of
of 0.09–0.31. These results indicate that appearance-related social
thin ideal internalization and comparison tendencies.
comparison and body surveillance partially mediated the rela-
Additionally, although research has indicated that the majority
tion between thin ideal internalization and body dissatisfaction.
of comparisons that females make are in the upward direction (e.g.,
Specific indirect effects estimates again indicated that body surveil-
Leahey et al., 2007), it is unclear that this was necessarily the case in
lance was a unique and significant mediator of the thin ideal
the current study. Thus, some participants may have been reporting
internalization–body dissatisfaction relation, with a standardized
on upward comparisons while others may have been reporting on
point estimate of 0.17 (p < .001) and a 95% BC CI of 0.09–0.25.
downward comparisons (which research has generally found to be
Like general social comparison, appearance-related social compar-
associated with positive effects; e.g., Marsh & Parker, 1984; Testa
ison did not add significantly to the model, with a standardized
& Major, 1990); such a pattern of responding may have washed
point estimate of 0.03 (p = .558) and a 95% BC CI of −0.07 to 0.13.
out the potential mediating effects of upward social comparisons in
A contrast indicated that the indirect effect of body surveillance
the thin ideal internalization–body dissatisfaction relation. Indeed,
in the thin ideal internalization–body dissatisfaction relation was
O’Brien et al. (2009) noted that the tendency to make upward
marginally significantly stronger (p = .053) than the indirect effect
versus downward appearance comparisons differs across individ-
of appearance-related social comparison in this model (see Fig. 2
uals. Given this, it may be important for future research to examine
for the full meditational model).1
a measure that captures only upward appearance-related compar-
isons (such as the Upward Physical Appearance Comparison Scale
Discussion (UPACS); O’Brien et al., 2009) in the study model. In sum, future
research will likely benefit from more nuanced definitions of social
The present study sought to examine the potential mediating comparison.
roles of social comparison (both as general tendencies and related In terms of strengths, the current study adds to the sociocul-
to appearance) and body surveillance (i.e., the indicator of self- tural model of disordered eating by examining exactly how thin
objectification) in the relation between thin ideal internalization ideal internalization may manifest itself in body dissatisfaction.
and body dissatisfaction. Results indicated that, as a set, these two The measurement of social comparison tendencies in two ways
constructs mediated this relation; however, only body surveillance is a strength of the current study; that is, social comparison was
emerged as a significant specific mediator. That is, neither general measured both broadly (i.e., tendency to compare generally, as
nor appearance-related social comparison was a significant spe- measured by the INCOM) and specific to a domain that we hypothe-
cific mediator of the thin ideal internalization–body dissatisfaction sized would be likely to affect body dissatisfaction (i.e., tendency to
relation beyond the explanatory power of body surveillance. make appearance-related social comparisons, as measured by the
Overall, body surveillance acted as we had expected – as a fac- PACS), permitting the investigation of both comparison constructs.
tor that may explain how thin ideal internalization translates itself The examination of body surveillance as a mediating variable is
into body dissatisfaction. Results of the current study provide some also a strength since it follows up on Myers and Crowther’s (2007)
evidence that this behavior may serve as a mechanism that enables work by testing the behavioral indicator of self-objectification,
women to assess their standing relative to the thin ideal. Such body body surveillance, which is a behavior that could be targeted in
monitoring may lead a woman to realize there is a discrepancy prevention and treatment efforts. Finally, the rigorous mediational
between her current and ideal selves, which may in turn lead to analyses (i.e., bootstrapping) are a strength of the current study
dissatisfaction with the body. and permitted the comparison of mediators in a potential “nexus
However, contrary to our hypotheses, neither general nor of influence” (Hesse-Biber et al., 2006).
appearance-related social comparison tendencies emerged as a While results of the current study extend prior research, there
significant specific mediator of the relation between thin ideal are several limitations that should be addressed in the future. Such
limitations include the cross-sectional nature of the study, which
limits our ability to make causal conclusions, and the utilization of
1
When the full versions of the SATATQ Internalization-General and OBCS Body measures that raise some conceptual overlap concerns (although,
Surveillance subscales were used, the same pattern of results emerged (i.e., for the efforts were made to minimize such concerns). Future research
correlational analyses and meditation models) with the exception that the contrast
between the appearance-related social comparison and body surveillance indirect
should test this model longitudinally and in the context of the
effects went from marginally significant when using the modified versions of the full elaborated sociocultural model of disordered eating. Future
subscales to significant (p = .016) when using the full versions. research may also wish to examine the study mediation models in a
48 E.E. Fitzsimmons-Craft et al. / Body Image 9 (2012) 43–49

more diverse sample of women, as participants in the current study Blowers, L. C., Loxton, N. J., Grady-Flesser, M., Occhipinti, S. & Dawe, S. (2003). The
were undergraduate women and mostly Caucasian. As previously relationship between sociocultural pressure to be thin and body dissatisfaction
in preadolescent girls. Eating Behaviors, 4, 229–244.
mentioned, future research will likely benefit from examining and Brownell, K. D. (1991). Dieting and the search for the perfect body: Where physiology
measuring social comparison as it relates to body dissatisfaction and culture collide. Behavior Therapy, 22, 1–12.
in a more nuanced way. Additionally, future research may ben- Calogero, R. M., Davis, W. N. & Thompson, J. K. (2004). The Sociocultural Attitudes
Toward Appearance Questionnaire (SATAQ-3): Reliability and normative com-
efit from utilizing ecological momentary assessment (EMA)/daily parisons of eating disordered patients. Body Image, 1, 193–198.
diary methods in examining the complex interrelations between Calogero, R. M., Davis, W. N. & Thompson, J. (2005). The role of self-objectification
social comparison, body surveillance, body dissatisfaction, and dis- in the experience of women with eating disorders. Sex Roles, 52, 43–50.
Cash, T. F. & Szymanski, M. L. (1995). The development and validation of the Body-
ordered eating, as well as other potentially important constructs, Image Ideals Questionnaire. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 466–477.
such as negative affect. Such intense data collection methods Chernin, K. (1981). The obsession: Reflections on the tyranny of slenderness. New York:
would likely provide more detailed information on the relations Harper.
Dittmar, H. & Howard, S. (2004). Ideal-body internalization and social comparison
between these constructs (e.g., whether they reciprocally influence
tendency as moderators of thin media models’ impact on women’s body-focused
on another, how emotions play a role). For instance, it may be that anxiety. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 747–770.
social psychological theories, such as those addressed in the cur- Engeln-Maddox, R. (2005). Cognitive responses to idealized media images of
rent study, could be incorporated into an elaborated sociocultural women: The relationship of social comparison and critical processing to body
image disturbance in college women. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 24,
model of disordered eating, providing researchers and clinicians 1114–1138.
with a more comprehensive understanding of college women’s Fairburn, C. G. (2008). Cognitive behavior therapy and eating disorders. New York:
body dissatisfaction and eating disorder symptoms (Fitzsimmons- Guilford.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7,
Craft, 2011). The development of more integrative theories of body 117–140.
image may then contribute to the creation of effective prevention Fitzsimmons-Craft, E. E. (2011). Social psychological theories of disordered eat-
and intervention programming tailored specifically for this group. ing in college women: Review and integration. Clinical Psychology Review, 31,
1224–1237. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2011.07.011
Lastly, it will likely be informative for future research to assess Franko, D. L. & Omori, M. (1999). Subclinical eating disorders in adolescent women:
whether the presence of certain moderating factors (e.g., accultura- A test of the continuity hypothesis and its psychological correlates. Journal of
tion, perfectionism) makes it more likely for social comparison and Adolescence, 22, 389–396.
Fredrickson, B. L. & Roberts, T. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understand-
body surveillance to mediate the thin ideal internalization–body ing women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women
dissatisfaction relation. Quarterly, 21, 173–206.
The current findings highlight the importance of targeting body Fredrickson, B. L., Roberts, T., Noll, S. M., Quinn, D. M. & Twenge, J. M. (1998). That
swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating,
surveillance in clinical settings. Indeed, body checking, or persis-
and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 269–284.
tently surveying one’s body (e.g., touching one’s collar bones to Garner, D. M, Olmstead, M. P. & Polivy, J. (1983). The development and validation of
determine the bones’ prominence) is conceptualized as a form of a multidimensional eating disorder inventory for anorexia nervosa and bulimia.
body surveillance and has been suggested as an important focus in International Journal of Eating Disorders, 2, 15–34.
Gibbons, F. X. & Buunk, B. P. (1999). Individual differences in social comparison:
cognitive-behavioral therapy for eating disorders (Fairburn, 2008). Development of a scale of social comparison orientation. Journal of Personality
Many individuals engaging in body checking may not disclose these and Social Psychology, 76, 129–142.
behaviors to clinicians or even notice their repeated checking, Gilbert, N. & Meyer, C. (2003). Social anxiety and social comparison: Differential
links with restrictive and bulimic attitudes among nonclinical women. Eating
as many women have been socialized to assume monitoring and Behaviors, 4, 257–264.
enhancing their physical appearance is natural (Calogero, Davis, Gilbert, S. & Thompson, J. K. (1996). Feminist explanations of the development of eat-
& Thompson, 2005; Fairburn, 2008). Thus, building awareness of ing disorders: Common themes, research findings, and methodological issues.
Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 3, 183–202.
these surveillance behaviors through self-monitoring as well as Halliwell, E. & Dittmar, H. (2004). Does size matter? The impact of model’s body
structuring cognitive and behavioral change of these behaviors size on advertising effectiveness and women’s body-focused anxiety. Journal of
may help halt the translation of thin ideal internalization into Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 105–132.
Harper, B. & Tiggemann, M. (2008). The effect of thin ideal media images on women’s
body dissatisfaction. Decreasing surveillance behaviors may facili-
self-objectification, mood, and body image. Sex Roles, 58, 649–657.
tate an individual’s conceptualization of her body as an instrument Harrison, K. (2001). Ourselves, our bodies: Thin-ideal media, self-discrepancies, and
of function rather than her body as an object not meeting her eating disorder symptomatology in adolescents. Journal of Social and Clinical
Psychology, 20, 289–323.
internalized, idealized standards. In addition, future research inves-
Heatherton, T. F, Nichols, P., Mahamedi, F. & Keel, P. (1995). Body weight, dieting,
tigating nuanced components of social comparison (e.g., upward and eating disorder symptoms among college students, 1982 to 1992. American
appearance-related comparison) and their influence on body dis- Journal of Psychiatry, 152, 1623–1629.
satisfaction may further inform treatment approach. Hesse-Biber, S., Leavy, P., Quinn, C. E. & Zoino, J. (2006). The mass marketing of dis-
ordered eating and eating disorders: The social psychology of women, thinness
In conclusion, the results reported here provide evidence and culture. Women’s Studies International Forum, 29, 208–224.
that overall, social comparison and body surveillance mediated Hesse-Biber, S., Marino, M. & Watts-Roy, D. (1999). A longitudinal study of eating
the relation between thin ideal internalization and body dissat- disorders among college women: Factors that influence recovery. Gender and
Society, 13, 385–408.
isfaction in a sample of college women. However, only body Hoerr, S. L, Bokram, R., Lugo, B., Bivins, T. & Keast, D. R. (2002). Risk for disordered
surveillance emerged as a significant specific mediator of this eating relates to both gender and ethnicity for college students. Journal of the
relation – that is, neither general social comparison tendencies American College of Nutrition, 21, 307–314.
Keel, P. K., Heatherton, T. F., Dorer, D. J., Joiner, T. E. & Zalta, A. K. (2006). Point
nor appearance-related social comparison tendencies emerged as prevalence of bulimia nervosa in 1982, 1992, and 2002. Psychological Medicine,
specific mediators. Thus, results of the current study provide sup- 36, 119–127. doi:10.1017/S0033291705006148
port for primarily body surveillance helping to explain how thin Keery, H., van den Berg, P. & Thompson, J. K. (2004). An evaluation of the tripartite
influence model of body dissatisfaction and eating disturbance with adolescent
ideal internalization may lead to body dissatisfaction, providing
girls. Body Image, 1, 237–251.
researchers and clinicians with some understanding of how one Knauss, C., Paxton, S. J. & Alsaker, F. D. (2008). Body dissatisfaction in adolescent
comes to recognize she does not live up to her own internalized boys and girls: Objectified body consciousness, internalization of the media body
ideal and perceived pressure from media. Sex Roles, 59, 633–643.
appearance standards and subsequently, feel badly about her body.
Krahn, D. D., Kurth, C. L., Gomberg, E. & Drewnowski, A. (2005). Pathological dieting
and alcohol use in college women—A continuum of behaviors. Eating Behaviors,
6, 43–52. doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2004.08.004
References Leahey, T. M., Crowther, J. H. & Mickelson, K. D. (2007). The frequency, nature, and
effects of naturally occurring appearance-focused social comparisons. Behavior
Berg, K. C., Frazier, P. & Sherr, L. (2009). Change in eating disorder attitudes and Therapy, 38, 132–143.
behavior in college women: Prevalence and predictors. Eating Behaviors, 10, Lindner, D., Hughes, A. & Fahy, R. (2008). Eating pathology and social comparison in
137–142. doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2009.03.003 college females. North American Journal of Psychology, 10, 445–462.
 E.E. Fitzsimmons-Craft et al. / Body Image 9 (2012) 43–49 49

MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M. & Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the Shaw, J. & Waller, G. (1995). The media’s impact on body image: Implications for pre-
indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate vention and treatment. Eating Disorders: The Journal of Treatment & Prevention,
Behavioral Research, 39, 99–128. 3, 115–123.
Malkin, A. R., Wornian, K. & Chrisler, J. C. (1999). Women and weight: Gendered Shroff, H. & Thompson, J. K. (2006). The tripartite influence model of body image
messages on magazine covers. Sex Roles, 40, 647–655. and eating disturbance: A replication with adolescent girls. Body Image, 3,
Marsh, H. W. & Parker, J. W. (1984). Determinants of student self-concept: Is it better 17–23.
to be a relatively large fish in a small pond even if you don’t learn to swim as Shrout, P. E. & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimen-
well? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 213–231. tal studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7,
McKinley, N. M. (1998). Gender differences in undergraduates’ body esteem: The 422–445.
mediating effect of objectified body consciousness and actual/ideal weight dis- Silberstein, L. R., Striegel-Moore, R. H., Timko, C. & Rodin, J. (1988). Behavioral and
crepancy. Sex Roles, 39, 113–123. psychological implications of body dissatisfaction: Do men and women differ?
McKinley, N. M. (2004). Resisting body dissatisfaction: Fat women who endorse fat Sex Roles, 19, 219–232.
acceptance. Body Image, 1, 213–219. Spillane, N. S., Boerner, L. M., Anderson, K. G. & Smith, G. T. (2004). Comparability
McKinley, N. M. & Hyde, J. S. (1996). The Objectified Body Consciousness Scale: of the Eating Disorder Inventory-2 between women and men. Assessment, 11,
Development and validation. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 181–215. 85–93.
Mintz, L. B. & Betz, N. E. (1988). Prevalence and correlations of eating disordered Spitzer, B. L., Henderson, K. A. & Zivian, M. T. (1999). Gender differences in population
behaviors among undergraduate women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35, versus media body sizes: A comparison over four decades. Sex Roles, 40, 545–565.
463–471. Stice, E. (1994). Review of the evidence for a sociocultural model of bulimia nervosa
Mintz, L. B., O’Halloran, M. S., Mulholland, A. M. & Schneider, P. A. (1997). Question- and an exploration of the mechanisms of action. Clinical Psychology Review, 14,
naire for eating disorder diagnoses: Reliability and validity of operationalizing 633–661.
DSM-IV criteria into a self-report format. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44, Stice, E. (2002). Risk and maintenance factors for eating pathology: A meta-analytic
63–79. review. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 825–848.
Moradi, B. & Huang, Y. (2008). Objectification theory and psychology of women: A Stice, E., Nemeroff, C. & Shaw, H. E. (1996). Test of the dual pathway model of bulimia
decade of advances and future directions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, nervosa: Evidence for dietary restraint and affect regulation mechanisms. Jour-
377–398. nal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 15, 340–363.
Morrison, T. G., Kalin, R. & Morrison, M. A. (2004). Body-image evaluation and Stice, E. & Whitenton, K. (2002). Risk factors for body dissatisfaction in adolescent
body-image investment among adolescents: A test of sociocultural and social girls: A longitudinal investigation. Developmental Psychology, 38, 669–678.
comparison theories. Adolescence, 39, 571–592. Striegel-Moore, R. H., Silberstein, L. R. & Rodin, J. (1986). Toward an understanding
Morrison, T., Waller, G., Meyer, C., Burditt, E., Wright, F., Babbs, M., et al. (2003). of risk factors for bulimia. American Psychologist, 41, 246–263.
Social comparison in the eating disorders. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, Suls, J., Martin, R. & Wheeler, L. (2002). Social comparison: Why, with whom, and
191, 553–555. with what effect? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 159–163.
Muehlenkamp, J. J., Swanson, J. D. & Brausch, A. M. (2005). Self-objectification, risk Sypeck, M. F., Gray, J. J. & Ahrens, A. H. (2004). No longer just a pretty face: Fashion
taking, and self-harm in college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, magazines’ depictions of ideal female beauty from 1959 to 1999. International
24–32. Journal of Eating Disorders, 36, 342–347.
Muthén, L. K. & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus user’s guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén Testa, M. & Major, B. (1990). The impact of social comparisons after failure: The
& Muthén. moderating effects of perceived control. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 11,
Myers, T. A. & Crowther, J. H. (2007). Sociocultural pressures, thin-ideal internal- 205–218.
ization, self-objectification, and body dissatisfaction: Could feminist beliefs be Thompson, J. K., Heinberg, L. J., Altabe, M. & Tantleff-Dunn, S. (1999). Exacting beauty:
a moderating factor? Body Image, 4, 296–308. Theory, assessment, and treatment of body image disturbance. Washington, DC:
Myers, T. A. & Crowther, J. H. (2009). Social comparison as a predictor of body American Psychological Association.
dissatisfaction: A meta-analytic review, Journal of. Abnormal Psychology, 118, Thompson, J. K., Heinberg, L. J. & Tantleff, S. (1991). The Physical Appearance Com-
683–698. parison Scale (PACS). The Behavior Therapist, 14, 174.
Neighbors, L. A. & Sobal, J. (2007). Prevalence and magnitude of body weight and Thompson, J. K. & Stice, E. (2001). Thin-ideal internalization: Mounting evidence
shape dissatisfaction among university students. Eating Behaviors, 8, 429–439. for a new risk factor for body-image disturbance and eating pathology. Current
doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2007.03.003 Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 181–183.
O’Brien, K. S., Caputi, P., Minto, R., Peoples, G., Hooper, C., Kell, S., et al. (2009). Upward Thompson, J. K., van den Berg, P., Roehrig, M., Guarda, A. S. & Heinberg, L.
and downward physical appearance comparisons: Development of scales and J. (2004). The Sociocultural Attitudes Towards Appearance Scale-3 (SATAQ-
examination of predictive qualities. Body Image, 6, 201–206. 3): Development and validation. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 35,
Preacher, K. J. & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect 293–304.
effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Trampe, D., Stapel, D. A. & Siero, F. W. (2007). On models and vases: Body dissat-
Computers, 36, 717–731. isfaction and proneness to social comparison effects. Journal of Personality and
Preacher, K. J. & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for Social Psychology, 92, 106–118.
assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Tylka, T. L. & Sabik, N. J. (2010). Integrating social comparison theory and self-esteem
Research Methods, 40, 879–891. within objectification theory to predict women’s disordered eating. Sex Roles, 63,
Pyle, R. L., Neuman, P. A., Halvorson, P. A. & Mitchell, J. E. (1991). An ongoing 18–31.
cross-sectional study of the prevalence of eating disorders in freshman college Tylka, T. L. & Subich, L. M. (2004). Examining a multidimensional model of eating dis-
students. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 10, 667–677. order symptomatology among college women. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
Richins, M. L. (1991). Social comparison and the idealized images of advertising. 51, 314–328.
Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 71–83. Vohs, K. D., Heatherton, T. F. & Herrin, M. (2001). Disordered eating and the transi-
Rodgers, R. F., Paxton, S. J. & Chabrol, H. (2009). Effects of parental comments on body tion to college: A prospective study. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 29,
dissatisfaction and eating disturbance in young adults: A sociocultural model. 280–288.
Body Image, 6, 171–177.