Body dissatisfaction. In order to measure body dissatisfaction (difference between actual and ideal figure) and internalization of the ideal thin figure (defined as the selection of a thin silhouette from a group of silhouettes of various body sizes), a set of 10 silhouettes assumed to be neutral to ethnicity, culture, and details https://kissbrides.com/es/blog/rusas-mujeres-vs-americanas-femeninas/ (Figure 1) was used. A German work group (Jaeger, Massoubre & Lamprecht, 2000) originally developed these for a previous multi-cross-cultural study in a three-stage peer revision procedure. Four questions were asked in relation to the silhouette scales: « Please mark with a cross the silhouette that best represents the current shape of your body »; « What do you wish you looked like? »; « What is the most attractive silhouette in your opinion? »; « What do you find the most attractive silhouette in the opposite sex? » Participants were asked to mark with a cross the position representing their attitudes on a 0-10 decimal scale (Figure 1); positions between the two silhouettes were allowed and coded as real numbers. tt= 0.82 (« actual »); Rtt= 0.77 (« ideal »); Rtt= 0.71 (« attractive »); and those of convergent validity as: Rcit= 0.73 (« actual » and BMI). The procedures followed by the authors, as well as the psychometric features, are described in detail elsewhere (Jaeger et al., 2002; Jaeger et al., 2000).
Fat loss restraint try measured by the Fat reduction Measure of the Restaurants Thinking Take to (EAT) (Garner, Olmsted, Bohr & Garfinkel, 1982), made up of sixteen statements scored into a great six-point measure (never = 0/always = 5), having highest results showing a sophisticated out-of controlled dining. To your Eat psychometrical attributes find Gather et al. (1982). The latest surface coefficient for both trials, the brand new Mexican and German ones, is actually of the identical value, an alpha out of 0.76.
Losing weight restraint
Ineffectiveness scale. This new bad apply to grounds try projected from the Ineffectiveness Level off the newest Restaurants Issues List (EDI) (Garner ainsi que al., 1983), which has illustrated a beneficial convergent legitimacy (ineffectiveness/self esteem ) of R = 0.70 (p
Scientific employees got the weight and you will top tips
Bmi (BMI). Body mass index try determined as the lbs within the kilograms separated by top in the square meters (Body mass index = kg/m2).
Just before research range, an excellent pilot examination of the brand new Silhouettes Size (Profile 1), applied to an example consisting of 20 Mexican students, was utilized to test the brand new appropriateness of your own data in order to portray muscles types, to help you corroborate a beneficial acceptation off an unknown set of silhouettes and you can a very clear knowledge of the brand new directions (new German group currently measured which have studies in this esteem). The outcomes displayed new Outline Level is a good otherwise an suitable instrument into the Mexican sample.
New detectives of the two places, from the Mexico City as well as Hae (standardized) procedure. The fresh new forms was in fact put on groups of medical and you can nursing college students on North american country and you can German universities. A primary reason trailing new ples out of students related to treatments was precisely the attention one to (one can suppose) such young people should have to your medical career as well as for health issues, leading them to alot more attentive to dilemmas including ED. Advised concur is actually obtained from the research members. All of the contacted youngsters wanted to participate. The new particular regional stability committees accepted this new low-intrusive techniques. Elite translators undertook and controlled the latest translation and you may retranslation of the tools.
Age. The mean age of Mexican women (Mage = 20.4, SD = 0.49) and German women (Mage = 20.8, SD = 1.0) differed statistically: t(346)= 4.29, p = 0.000. It is important to note that we expected not to find a significant difference in this variable, but a minimal difference of a few tenths (0.4) resulted in a significant one, most likely due to the large size of the total sample, since in separate structural analysis, age accounted for