Sex differences in the nature,realism, and correlates of body image

The present study examined sex differences in the nature and realism of body-image satisfaction, and the extent to which sex and sex role ideology moderated the relationships of body image to other indices of self-esteem and well-being. Accordingly, scales assessing body cathexis, self-esteem, depression proneness, and sex role ideology, as well as a questionnaire assessing perceptions of weight and dieting activities, were completed by 135 college women and 129 college men. As expected, women indicated significantly greater dissatisfaction with their bodies than did men. Women were likely to perceive themselves as overweight or slightly overweight, regardless of their actual weight, and most wanted to lose weight. Men who were dissatisfied tended to perceive themselves as underweight and wanted to gain rather than to lose weight. For both sexes, less positive attitudes to ward one's body were related to lower levels of self-esteem, although the relationship was significantly stronger for women than for men. The relationship between body attitudes and self-esteem was of approximately equal magnitude among traditional vs feminist women. For both sexes, more negative attitudes towards one's body were related to greater proneness to depression. Implications for further research are discussed.     

Consequences of Repeated Critical Versus Neutral Body Checking in Women With High Shape or Weight Concern

Body checking is a repeated behavior conducted in an attempt to gain information about one’s shape, weight, size, or body composition. Body checking is associated with negative behavioral, emotional, and cognitive outcomes and may maintain body dissatisfaction and eating disorders. The precise function and consequences of body checking remain less well understood. Specifically, immediate and delayed impacts of repeated critical body checking (CBC) have not been determined. The current study randomly assigned 142 young women with high shape/weight concern to daily 10-min CBC, neutral body checking (NBC), or a non-body critical checking (NBCC) comparison condition, examining their immediate and delayed (one-week follow-up) effects on body satisfaction, self-esteem, and negative affect. Multilevel modeling and follow-up planned comparisons found that compared to NBCC, CBC participants’ body satisfaction and self-esteem immediately decreased, but negative affect improved from baseline to follow-up. Compared to CBC, NBC participants’ self-esteem and negative affect improved immediately, and their self-esteem improved over time compared to NBCC. Over time, all participants’ state body satisfaction improved, regardless of condition. Our findings suggest a 10-min CBC session may function differently than typical (harmful) in vivo body checking. However, reasons for this difference are unclear. Additional research is needed to distinguish (harmful) in vivo body checking from CBC procedures such as this and other mirror exposure interventions. Research is needed to examine the effects of varying CBC duration and instructions during body exposure to further clarify mechanisms of change during body exposures.     

“<Emphasis Type="Italic">Chalepa Ta Kala</Emphasis>,” “Fine Things are Difficult”: Socrates’ Insights into the Psychology of Teaching and Learning

The proverb “chalepa ta kala” (“fine things are difficult”) is invoked in three dialogues in the Platonic corpus: Hippias Major, Cratylus and Republic. In this paper, I argue that the context in which the proverb arises reveals Socrates’ considerable pedagogical dexterity as he uses the proverb to rebuke his interlocutor in one dialogue but to encourage his interlocutors in another. In the third, he gauges his interlocutors’ mention of the proverb to be indicative of their preparedness for a more difficult philosophical trial. What emerges in the study of these three Platonic dialogues is that Socrates believes that how he and others describe learning makes a tangible difference in philosophical investigation.     

Maternal Reports of Play Dates of Clinic Referred and Community Children

Recent interventions have focused upon play dates as a means to improve friendships. However, no measures have been published which quantify play date quality. An important characteristic of play dates in this regard may be the amount of conflict. We present the development of such a measure. We compare maternal reports of play dates for 112 community subjects with 48 subjects referred for peer problems (mean age = 8.7 years). We found that clinic–referred subjects had significantly fewer hosted and invited play dates than the community subjects. The mean conflict on play dates was significantly lower for the community subjects than for the clinic-referred subjects. We obtained significant correlations between conflict on play dates and measures of problem behaviors. Our results support the position that conflict on play dates is an important area to target in social skills training programs. The scale may prove useful to clinicians and researchers by facilitating screening and assessing interventions directed towards improving play dates.