Search

Objective: Female models are commonly viewed as "at‐risk" for eating and body image disorders. However, the existing literature is sparse and provides inconsistent evidence. It subsequently fails to decipher whether models are truly at any greater risk for body image disorders than non‐models. Such discrepancies may exist due to differences in population, method, and assessment, particularly where previous studies have focused on evaluative body image that mostly reflect normative body image concerns. This study sought to examine body image disturbance, dysmorphic appearance concern, the rate of probable eating disorders (EDs) and body dysmorphic disorder (BDD), depression, anxiety, stress, self‐esteem, and functional impairment in models. Method: A sample of 100 female models was compared to 100 age‐matched tertiary students on measures of ED symptoms, body dysmorphic symptoms, psychopathology, and functional impairment. Results: Ninety‐two models met referral criteria for an ED and 26 for non‐weight related BDD, compared to 53 (ED) and 2 (BDD) students. Models also reported greater body image disturbance, dysmorphic appearance concern, depression, stress, functional impairment, and ED symptoms, but equivalent degrees of anxiety, self‐esteem, and home‐based functional impairment. Conclusions: Not only are female models at‐risk of the physical effects of maintaining a clinically underweight body, but models are at greater risk of developing body image‐related psychological illnesses, experiencing emotional stressors, and facing functional impairment than their non‐model peers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the Body Image Concern Inventory (BICI); a self‐report measure of dysmorphic appearance concern. Methods: Internal consistency, concurrent validity, and construct validity were investigated among 761 female undergraduates. Criterion validity was also investigated with respect to body dysmorphic disorder (BDD). Results: The BICI appears internally consistent and displayed predictable relationships to depression, anxiety, self‐esteem, functional impairment, and body image disturbance. Three factors appeared to underlie the BICI (i.e. appearance preoccupation, appearance concern, coping behaviour), accounting for 52.13%, 7.77%, and 5.80% of the observed variance. Further analysis revealed that nine items could be removed from the BICI without notable change to its validity or reliability. This resulted in a shorter version of the BICI that demonstrated improved factor structure and internal consistency, with equivalent degrees of concurrent and criterion validity. Neither measure operated effectively as a diagnostic screen for BDD, reflected by low sensitivity and specificity values. Conclusions: Both appear to be reliable and valid measures that should predominantly be employed as continuous measures of body image preoccupation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Body image disturbance encompasses various cognitive and behavioural states originating from a distressing, negative evaluation of one's appearance. It is broader than negative body image, comprising not only dissatisfaction but also distress and dysfunction, and is a core feature of body dysmorphic disorder (BDD). This study had two broad aims: to establish normative values for body image disturbance within an Australian population and to examine the factor structure and psychometric properties of the Body Image Disturbance Questionnaire (BIDQ). Method: Australian undergraduate students (N = 950, 744 female) from Western Sydney completed the BIDQ, along with measures of clinical psychopathology, self‐esteem, and functional impairment. Results: The BIDQ displayed good internal consistency and predictable concurrent relationships with measures of depression, anxiety, stress, self‐esteem, and functional impairment. It also yielded a single latent construct, while higher scores were noted among participants who screened positively for BDD. Conclusions: BIDQ scores for this sample differ to those originally reported, which may reflect sample differences or cultural variation. These values provide a more accurate and reliable guide for clinicians using the BIDQ in Australia than previously available. Overall, the BIDQ demonstrates good psychometric efficacy in an undergraduate sample, although future research should validate the measure among wider clinical and community populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]