Drawings or 3D models: Do illustration methods matter when assessing perceived body size and body dissatisfaction?

Research has reported that both men and women experience body dissatisfaction. Among other instruments, a widely used method to assess perceived body size and body dissatisfaction are figure rating scales. Although a variety of illustration methods (e.g., three-dimensional, or 3D, models and line-drawing models) have been used to create these figure rating scales, to date, they have not been directly compared to one another. Thus, in the first study, which includes 511 participants at a mean age of 46 years old (range: 20–70), the present research work aims to assess how the line-drawing and 3D model scales, representing different body illustration methods, relate to each other. Furthermore, the first study assesses the validity of the indication of body dissatisfaction measured using these figure rating scales by comparing them to body checking or scrutinizing behavior and body appreciation levels. The project’s second study examines the two figure rating scales using objectively measured anthropometric data. In total, 239 participants at a mean age of 54 years (range: 18–94) were included. The results show that figure rating scales can be considered tools that measure perceptual body image due to their positive correlations with body checking behavior (for women) and their negative correlations with body appreciation. The 3D model and line-drawing scales show good to excellent inter-scale reliability, and both scales agree equally well with body mass index (BMI) measurements. Thus, the 3D model and line-drawing scales both seem well suited for assessing perceived body size and perceptual body dissatisfaction, suggesting that neither illustration method is superior to the other

Food choices for weight loss: what dietary strategies would people use?

Previous observational research showed that one of the most common strategies used to lose weight is to avoid or restrict the consumption of specific food items. However, the question of how people behave and implement strategies in actual decision-making situations involving food choices for weight loss purposes remains inconclusive. This experimental study using a food buffet aimed to examine people's different dietary strategies and motives for selecting foods for an entire day for weight loss purposes compared with a normal-day (ND) food selection. A total of 111 participants (55 % women) had to choose foods for both a ND and a weight loss day (WLD) (within-study design). Kilocalories and nutrients were calculated based on the weights of the foods selected, and food choice motives were assessed using a questionnaire. The results showed that for weight loss purposes, the participants selected more vegetables (both sexes) and unsweetened beverages (only men) while reducing their choices of high-fat and high-energy products (both sexes). Participants' food choices in both conditions (ND and WLD) differed from the official nutrition recommendations. They chose less carbohydrates and fibres and more fat and sugar than recommended. Health, kilocalories and nutrient content (carbohydrates, sugar, fat and protein) were more important food choice motives for weight loss purposes than for a ND food selection, while taste became less important. In conclusion, the participants appeared to be well capable of implementing several appropriate dietary strategies. Further research is needed to explore strategies to help them maintain these dietary changes over the long term.ISSN:0007-1145ISSN:1475-266

Drawings or 3D models: Do illustration methods matter when assessing perceived body size and body dissatisfaction?

Research has reported that both men and women experience body dissatisfaction. Among other instruments, a widely used method to assess perceived body size and body dissatisfaction are figure rating scales. Although a variety of illustration methods (e.g., three-dimensional, or 3D, models and line-drawing models) have been used to create these figure rating scales, to date, they have not been directly compared to one another. Thus, in the first study, which includes 511 participants at a mean age of 46 years old (range: 20-70), the present research work aims to assess how the line-drawing and 3D model scales, representing different body illustration methods, relate to each other. Furthermore, the first study assesses the validity of the indication of body dissatisfaction measured using these figure rating scales by comparing them to body checking or scrutinizing behavior and body appreciation levels. The project's second study examines the two figure rating scales using objectively measured anthropometric data. In total, 239 participants at a mean age of 54 years (range: 18-94) were included. The results show that figure rating scales can be considered tools that measure perceptual body image due to their positive correlations with body checking behavior (for women) and their negative correlations with body appreciation. The 3D model and line-drawing scales show good to excellent inter-scale reliability, and both scales agree equally well with body mass index (BMI) measurements. Thus, the 3D model and line-drawing scales both seem well suited for assessing perceived body size and perceptual body dissatisfaction, suggesting that neither illustration method is superior to the other.ISSN:1932-620