A comparison of brief mirror exposure techniques for extreme shape and weight concerns
Citation & Export
Hide
Simple citation
West, Julia A. (Julia Anne).
A comparison of brief mirror exposure techniques for extreme shape and weight concerns. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/doi:10.7282/T32N519MExport
Description
TitleA comparison of brief mirror exposure techniques for extreme shape and weight concerns
Date Created2012
Other Date2012-01 (degree)
Extentv, 41 p. : ill.
DescriptionThis study pilots the feasibility and effectiveness of two theoretically distinct, brief approaches to mirror exposure (ME)—a treatment for body dissatisfaction—against an ecologically-valid control condition with respect to improving body and appearance satisfaction and mood. Female undergraduates (N = 32) exhibiting clinical-level shape and weight concerns were randomized to complete a scripted, 5 minute ME exercise in either a mindfulness-based (MB; n = 11), cognitive-dissonance-based (CD; n = 10), or mirror-as-usual control (MAU; n = 11) condition. The MB condition focused on the nonjudgmental aspect of the Delinsky and Wilson (2006) mindfulness-based ME protocol, while the CD condition was adapted from an evidence-based eating disorders prevention program (Stice and Presnell, 2007). Participants completed the Satisfaction with Body Parts Scale (SBPS) and Visual Analog (VAS) measures of weight and appearance satisfaction, and mood and anxiety at baseline and post-intervention. ME exercises were recorded and coded for adherence to the scripted instructions. The present study is one of the first to pilot such a brief format of these ME approaches, as well as to directly compare two distinct ME approaches to an ecologically-valid control condition in women with clinical-level shape and weight concerns. Mixed model ANCOVAs indicated no change in VAS mood, anxiety, body anxiety, body feelings, and appearance satisfaction from baseline to posttest for any of the three conditions. A main effect of time was observed for VAS weight satisfaction, with all 3 conditions exhibiting an improvement in weight satisfaction from baseline to post-test, F (1, 28) = 9.701, p = 0.004, partial eta-squared = 0.26. A significant time by condition interaction was observed for the Satisfaction with Body Parts scale, F (2, 28) = 3.778, p = 0.035, partial eta-squared = 0.02. Post-hoc analyses revealed the CD condition resulted in significantly greater decreases in body dissatisfaction from baseline to posttest, than both the MB condition, and the MAU control condition, while the MB and MAU conditions did not differ from one another. Results are discussed within the context of the feasibility of using one session ME, as well as using an active mirror control as a comparison group.
NoteM.S.
NoteIncludes bibliographical references
Noteby Julia A. West
Genretheses, ETD graduate
Languageeng
CollectionGraduate School - New Brunswick Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Organization NameRutgers, The State University of New Jersey
RightsThe author owns the copyright to this work.
Statistical Profile