An examination of the direct and indirect effect of self-objectification and disordered eating. (13th April 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Giles, S.; Rabinowicz, J.; Raux, C.; Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M.; Krug, I.
• Is Part Of: European psychiatry. Volume 64:Supplement 1(2021)
• Page Start: S705
• Page End: S705
• Publication Date: 2021-04-13
• Subjects: eating disorders -- Self-objectification -- disordered eating -- ecological momentary assessment; Psychiatry -- Periodicals; Mental illness -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 616.89
• DOI: 10.1192/j.eurpsy.2021.1868
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0924-9338

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction: Objectification theory argues that self-objectification confers risk for disordered eating (DE) both directly, and indirectly through a cascade of negative psychological consequences (e.g. low mood and self-conscious body monitoring). Robust cross-sectional evidence supports these relationships. However, these cross-sectional studies do not provide evidence for the complex intraindividual psychological processes outlined in objectification theory which purportedly contribute to DE. Objectives: Using an ecological momentary assessment design, the current study investigated the direct within-person effect between state self-objectification and DE and examined the indirect within-person effect of negative mood and body comparisons, on the relationship between state self-objectification and DE. Methods: Two-hundred female participants (M=20.43 years, SD=4.60) downloaded a smartphone app which assessed momentary experiences of self-objectification, mood, body comparisons, and DE six times per day at random intervals for seven days. Results: Indicated that self-objectification significantly predicted DE behaviours [95% CI 0.01, 0.03] and body comparisons [95% CI 0.32, 0.41]. However, the indirect effect of body comparisons on the relationship between state self-objectification and DE was not significant [95% CI -0.01, 0.00]. In the second mediation model, self-objectification significantly predicted DE behaviours [95% CI 0.01, 0.03], but did not significantly predict mood [95% CI -0.06, 0.03]. Similarly, the indirect effect of mood on the relationship between state self-objectification and DE was not significant [95% CI -0.00, 0.00]. Conclusions: These results enhance our understanding of objectification theory and suggest that self-objectification confers risk to DE directly. However, our findings do not support the indirect effect of self-objectification on DE through low mood or body comparisons. Disclosure: No significant relationships.