Sociology Research Paper on Globalization and Cultural Reproduction of the European Beauty Standard

I r b

E C

a

A R R A

K B M A T

d m d & a a f t i p M e i t l o b

h

T

1 h

Body Image 10 (2013) 501–508

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Body Image

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / b o d y i m a g e

nternalization of U.S. female beauty standards as a mediator of the elationship between Mexican American women’s acculturation and ody dissatisfaction

lizabeth Poloskov ∗, Terence J.G. Tracey ounseling and Counseling Psychology, Arizona State University, 446 Payne Hall, mc-0811, Tempe, AZ 85287-0811, United States

r t i c l e i n f o

rticle history: eceived 1 January 2012 eceived in revised form 17 May 2013 ccepted 21 May 2013

a b s t r a c t

The relationships among acculturation, internalization of U.S. sociocultural standards of female beauty, and body dissatisfaction were examined in a sample of 211 Mexican American college women. Structural equation modeling was used to identify the paths among these three factors. Results demonstrated that there are two distinct types of body dissatisfaction: global evaluations and composite site-specific eval-

eywords: ody dissatisfaction exican American women

cculturation hin-ideal internalization

uations. The relationships between acculturation toward dominant U.S. culture and both types of body dissatisfaction were found to be fully mediated by internalization of U.S. standards of female beauty. There were no relationships between Mexican orientation and any of the study variables. The results from this study imply that it is important for therapists working with Mexican American female clients to assess the client’s level of acculturation, examine the cultural (U.S. and Mexican) messages the client receives, and explore how these messages impact her body image.

© 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Introduction

Body dissatisfaction has been identified as an antecedent to isordered eating behaviors (Stice, 2002) and linked to negative ental and behavioral outcomes such as poor self-esteem, anxiety,

epression, and substance abuse (Choate, 2005; Nieri, Kulis, Keith, Hurdle, 2005). Researchers have noted that body dissatisfaction

nd disordered eating behaviors were originally conceptualized s issues of concern for predominantly Caucasian, middle-class, emale populations (Wildes, Emery, & Simons, 2001). However, here is growing evidence that Latinos also experience body dissat- sfaction and disordered eating (Grabe & Hyde, 2006). The primary urpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of how exican American women experience body dissatisfaction. We

xamined how acculturation to dominant U.S. culture and internal- zation of U.S. sociocultural standards of female beauty were related o body dissatisfaction among Mexican American college students iving in the U.S. Specifically, we assessed whether internalization f U.S. sociocultural standards of beauty mediated the relationship

etween acculturation and body dissatisfaction.

Body dissatisfaction, an attitudinal component of body image, as been commonly conceptualized as the negatively evaluated

∗ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (E. Poloskov),

[email protected] (T.J.G. Tracey).

740-1445/$ – see front matter © 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.05.005

discrepancy between people’s perceived physical appearance and their ideal physical appearance (Gardner, 2002). Body image is one dimension of a person’s overall self-concept. Given that one’s self-concept is strongly influenced by the culture in which one lives (Markus & Wurf, 1987; McCann, 1992), body dissatis- faction must also be guided by culture and in the present study the juxtaposition of two cultures, or acculturation. Originally defined by Redfield, Linton, and Herskovits (1936, p. 149) and adopted by subsequent researchers (Berry, 1980; Cuellar, Arnold, & Maldonado, 1995), “acculturation comprehends those phenomena which result when groups of individuals having different cultures come into continuous first-hand contact, with subsequent changes in the original cultural patterns of either or both groups.” In the acculturation process, individuals may experience a change in their customs, attitudes, behaviors, beliefs, lifestyle, language usage, habits, and values as a result of contact and interaction with another culture (Graves, 1967). According to current theory, acculturation does not occur strictly along a unilinear continuum; instead, movement toward the host society and retention of one’s original culture are two independent dimensions (Berry, 1980). Today, it is generally held that in the acculturation process, an individual can adopt or reject aspects of the dominant/host culture and maintain or abandon cultural beliefs and practices of his or

her original culture (Cuellar et al., 1995). This conceptualization allows for an individual to simultaneously adopt aspects of both the dominant/host and original cultures (Berry, 1980).

5 Body I

b s e r f a O t ( v ( n t r d c

b m U C T P 2 2 c i

U t M i h t e e t c s

m m m t p U d o a p d o w

o h c d i s t c L t 2

02 E. Poloskov, T.J.G. Tracey /

Because of this conceptualization, both the relationship etween U.S. culture and body dissatisfaction and the relation- hip between Mexican culture and body dissatisfaction should be xamined. There is very little research that specifically assesses the elationship between endorsing Mexican culture and body dissatis- action among Mexican Americans. Of the research that exists, there ppears to be a negative relationship (Bettendorf & Fischer, 2009). ne possible explanation for this relationship is that Mexican cul-

ural values, which emphasize collectivism and interconnectedness Santiago-Rivera, Arredondo, & Gallardo-Cooper, 2002), place less alue on a woman’s body as the primary determinant of her worth Castillo & Cano, 2007). In collectivistic cultures, what is valued is ot the individual self (including one’s body) but rather the rela- ionships of the person to others (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). More esearch is needed that examines the relationship between body issatisfaction and endorsement of Mexican culture among Mexi- an Americans.

Research exploring acculturation to dominant U.S. culture and ody dissatisfaction among Mexican American samples has yielded ixed results. Some scholars have suggested that acculturation to .S. culture and body dissatisfaction were unrelated (Blow, Taylor, ooper, & Redfearn, 2010; Gowen, Hayward, Killen, Robinson, & aylor, 1999; Joiner & Kashubeck, 1996; Lester & Petrie, 1995; erez, Voelz, Pettit, & Joiner, 2002; Warren, Castillo, & Gleaves, 010), while others have found a negative relationship (Nieri et al., 005). Still other scholars have found that acculturation to U.S. ulture increased the likelihood of body dissatisfaction among Mex- can Americans (Bettendorf & Fischer, 2009).

The mixed findings in the literature regarding acculturation to .S. culture and body dissatisfaction may be a result of the inconsis-

ent measurement of acculturation (Lara, Gamboa, Kahramanian, orales, & Bautista, 2005; Warren et al., 2010). Specifically for Mex-

can American populations, acculturation to dominant U.S. culture as been measured by generational status, length of residence in he U.S., language familiarity and usage, acculturative stress, par- nt ethnicity, and/or affiliation with U.S. societal values (e.g., Gowen t al., 1999; Nieri et al., 2005; Perez et al., 2002). Many accultura- ion scales were either too broad of a measure of exposure to U.S. ulture (Lester & Petrie, 1995) or too specific in their reliance on ingle components of culture to be useful.

Additionally, results have varied depending on whether easures conceptualize acculturation as a unidimensional or ultidimensional process. Of the studies that utilize a multidi- ensional conceptualization with Mexican American populations,

here appears to be either no correlation (Warren et al., 2010) or a ositive correlation (Bettendorf & Fischer, 2009) between adopting .S. culture and body dissatisfaction. A possible explanation for this iscrepant finding is the difference between the actual dimensions f acculturation the two studies measured. Whereas Bettendorf nd Fischer (2009) assessed orientation toward U.S. culture (inde- endent of orientation toward Mexican culture) to predict body issatisfaction, Warren et al. (2010) assessed the combination of rientations (U.S. and Mexican) to predict body dissatisfaction, hich confounds the two cultural affiliations.

While the broad concept of acculturation, especially adoption f dominant U.S. culture, has been linked with body image, per- aps it is adopting a more specific component of each culture (i.e., ultural beliefs about female beauty) that more accurately pre- icts body image. According to the sociocultural perspective, it

s culture that defines beauty (Jackson, 2002). One of the most alient means by which people arrive at their definition of beauty is hrough the messages they receive from society. Studies on Latino

ulture, of which Mexicans are one subgroup, have found that atino culture puts forth a larger, curvier female ideal compared o the U.S. female beauty ideal (Gil-Kashiwabara, 2002; Schooler, 008). Providing support for the notion that Mexican culture

mage 10 (2013) 501–508

indeed differs from the U.S. on its view of the ideal female body, Crandall and Martinez (1996) found that Mexican female col- lege students reported less concern about their weight and more acceptance of overweight people than U.S. female college stu- dents.

Conversely, studies on U.S. culture have shown that the cen- tral characteristic of female beauty is thinness (Mussell, Binford, & Fulkerson, 2000) and “thinness at a level that is impossible for most women to achieve by healthy means” (Tiggemann, 2002, p. 91). U.S. media convey the message that slender women are attractive and overweight women are unattractive (Perez et al., 2002; Tiggemann, 2002). Beyond attractiveness, a slender female is perceived as more popular, confident, happy, respected and successful in the U.S. (Choate, 2005).

Internalization is the extent to which a person internalizes or adopts a standard (Heinberg, Thompson, & Stormer, 1995). Research has linked internalization of U.S. sociocultural standards of beauty to acculturation to dominant U.S. culture. Specifically, studies have shown that greater acculturation to U.S. culture has been linked with preference for thin body types among Mexican Americans (Cachelin, Monreal, & Juarez, 2006; Olvera, Suminski, & Power, 2005). However, similar to the mixed results within the acculturation and body image literature, there are studies that report no relationship between acculturation and internalization of U.S. sociocultural standards of beauty (Blow et al., 2010; Lester & Petrie, 1995). Again, the issue of appropriate measurement may explain the discrepancies. Studies that used a multidimensional approach to acculturation and specifically assessed the relation- ship between internalization of sociocultural ideals and orientation toward dominant U.S. culture reported a positive relationship (Cachelin et al., 2006).

Internalization of U.S. sociocultural standards of beauty has also strongly predicted negative body image and increased body dis- satisfaction across heterogeneous samples (Cashel, Cunningham, Landeros, Cokley, & Muhammad, 2003; Forbes & Jung, 2008; Thompson & Stice, 2001) and within Mexican American popula- tions (Warren et al., 2010). However, little research has examined the relationships among acculturation, internalization of U.S. socio- cultural female beauty ideals, and body dissatisfaction, much less the relationships of all three constructs within a Mexican American sample. The primary purpose of the present study was to examine these relationships among undergraduate and graduate Mexican American female college students. The primary research ques- tion was whether internalization of U.S. sociocultural standards of female beauty mediated the relationship between acculturation and body dissatisfaction.

A secondary purpose of the present study was to assess the distinction between two methods of measuring overall body dissatisfaction: composite site-specific assessment and global assessment. The broad definition of body dissatisfaction as the neg- atively evaluated discrepancy between people’s perceived physical appearance and their ideal physical appearance (Gardner, 2002) does not address whether it is attitudes toward specific physi- cal attributes or toward overall general appearance; the definition simply contends that people are dissatisfied with some aspect of their appearance. Body dissatisfaction measures have been cre- ated that assess overall body dissatisfaction in different ways. There are dissatisfaction measures based on the sum/composite of dissatisfaction with specific sites on the body such as the Eat- ing Disorder Inventory – Body Dissatisfaction Subscale (EDI-BD; Garner, Olmsted, & Polivy, 1983), and there are measures that assess dissatisfaction with overall physical appearance such as the

Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire-Appearance Evaluation subscale (MBSRQ-AE; Cash, 2000). Both forms of assessing body dissatisfaction have been used in the field to mea- sure overall body dissatisfaction.

Body I

fl a d t m p w u o ( o t e b n

s s b s e o n a s a s

t t s p c i ( t p w

s t a t B s r t b g d m T a B h i w i

b b c c o s

E. Poloskov, T.J.G. Tracey /

Thompson (2004) contended that “one of the problems that ows from using only one of these two scales (global or specific) is n interpretive one. Any analysis of results that does not confine the iscussion to the specific type of measure may produce conclusions hat are erroneous” (p. 9). Use of a composite site-specific measure

ay not capture the full experience. People may not like specific arts of their body (e.g., thighs or stomach) but may be satisfied ith their overall physical appearance. Conversely, a negative eval- ation of one specific part of the body may heavily influence their verall appearance evaluation. For example, Forbes and Frederick 2008) found greater breast dissatisfaction was linked to greater verall body dissatisfaction among White college females; it was he high valence of dissatisfaction with a specific site that influ- nced their overall evaluation. However, the parallel relationship etween breast dissatisfaction and global body dissatisfaction did ot hold true for the Latina portion of the sample.

Thus, the secondary research question was whether composite ite-specific body dissatisfaction measures based on the sum of dis- atisfaction with numerous body sites captures the same domain of ody dissatisfaction as global body dissatisfaction measures. Some tudies suggest substantial overlap between the measures (Perez t al., 2002; Thompson, Altabe, Johnson, & Stormer, 1994) while thers suggest that correlations among the measures were not sig- ificant enough to signify redundancy (Forbes & Jung, 2008). In ccordance with Thompson’s (2004) suggestion and in order to hed light on the distinction (if any) between a global evaluation nd evaluation based on the composite of specific body sites, this tudy utilized both types of body dissatisfaction measures.

In summary, a mediation model was proposed where accultura- ion to dominant U.S. culture was related to body dissatisfaction and hat this relationship was mediated by the internalization of U.S. ociocultural standard of female beauty. Internalization has been roposed and found to account for the relationship between various ultural influences and body dissatisfaction, justifying internal- zation’s role as a mediator of this link within the present study Thompson, Heinberg, Altabe, & Tantleff-Dunn, 1999). Additionally, he predictive power of acculturation and internalization on com- osite site-specific versus global measures of body dissatisfaction as examined.

Our hypothesized model is presented in Fig. 1. We hypothe- ized that orientation toward dominant U.S. culture would relate o both global and composite site-specific body dissatisfaction nd that internalization of U.S. beauty standards would mediate hese acculturation–body dissatisfaction relationships. Based on ettendorf and Fischer’s (2009) research in which a multidimen- ional measure of orientation toward U.S. culture was positively elated to body dissatisfaction, we hypothesized that accultura- ion to dominant U.S. culture would predict composite site-specific ody dissatisfaction (path A). Because composite site-specific and lobal body dissatisfaction measures both purport to assess body issatisfaction and because studies have shown these types of easures to be correlated (Forbes & Jung, 2008; Perez et al., 2002;

hompson et al., 1994), we hypothesized a positive path between cculturation to U.S. culture and global body dissatisfaction (path ). Additionally, as greater acculturation into dominant U.S. culture as been linked with preference for thinner body types among Mex-

can American women (Cachelin et al., 2006; Olvera et al., 2005), e hypothesized that acculturation to U.S. culture would predict

nternalization of U.S. female beauty standards (path C). We did not expect that Mexican orientation would be related to

ody dissatisfaction and internalization of U.S. standards of beauty ecause of the different body image ideals associated with Mexi-

an culture. Mexican culture puts forth a larger, curvier female ideal ompared to the U.S. ideal (Schooler, 2008) and places a high value n interdependence in defining worth (Castillo & Cano, 2007). As uch we did not expect orientation toward Mexican culture to be

mage 10 (2013) 501–508 503

significantly linked to internalization (path D) or body dissatisfac- tion (paths E & F). However, because theoretically, culture drives one’s self-concept, value systems, and beliefs (Markus & Wurf, 1987; McCann, 1992), we allowed the potential of a relationship in our original model.

Regarding the paths from internalization of U.S. standards of beauty to composite site-specific body dissatisfaction (path G) and internalization and global body dissatisfaction (path H), we predicted significant positive paths such that greater internaliza- tion would be positively related to both composite site-specific and global body dissatisfaction. Numerous studies have shown that an increase in internalization of the U.S. ideal is associated with increased body dissatisfaction (Cafri, Yamamiya, Brannick, & Thompson, 2005; Choate, 2005; Forbes & Jung, 2008; Warren et al., 2010).

Also, we investigated the relation (overlap or independence) between composite site-specific and global evaluative attitude measures. As they both purport to measure body dissatisfaction, we hypothesized a significant correlation between the two measures (path I). However, as there is confusion in the literature concerning these measures, we did not propose specific hypotheses regarding what we expected to find in regards to which measure is more strongly related to acculturation and internalization.

Method

Participants

Participants were 211 Mexican and Mexican American female undergraduate and graduate students at a large southwestern uni- versity. Data were analyzed from students who self-identified as Mexican or Mexican American. Participants ranged in age between 18 and 60 years old with an average age of 25.8 years (SD = 8.68). They ranged in body mass index (BMI = kg/m2) between 17.20 and 54.87 with an average BMI of 25.67 (SD = 6.10). In terms of year in school, 27 (13%) were in their first year, 34 (16%) were in their sec- ond year, 33 (16%) were in their third year, 56 (27%) were in their fourth year, 11 (5%) were in their fifth year, 19 (10%) were master’s level, and 15 (7%) were doctoral level; 16 (8%) gave no response.

Measures

Composite site-specific body evaluation. The Eating Disor- der Inventory-Body Dissatisfaction subscale (EDI-BD; Garner et al., 1983) is 9-item scale designed to assess dissatisfaction with specific body sites that generally become larger with puberty for women. On items such as “I think that my stomach is too big” participant responses can range from 1 (never) to 6 (always). Rather than only considering the three item response options in the clinical range, all six response options for this subscale were scored (Thompson, van den Berg, Roehig, Guarda, & Heinberg, 2004). Using the aver- age score of continuous ratings is recommended in non-clinical samples (Siever, 1994). Higher scores were indicative of greater body dissatisfaction. The EDI-BD has shown significant correlations with a separate measures that assessed overall body dissatisfac- tion (r = .55) and dissatisfaction with female maturation regions including breasts, buttocks, hips and abdomen (r = .69), supporting its convergent validity (Garner et al., 1983). Providing evidence for discriminant validity, Garner et al. (1983) reported that the EDI-BD was not strongly correlated with measures that assessed factors beyond evaluative attitudes toward the body (i.e., measures

of self-esteem, locus of control, feelings of inadequacy, physical anhedonia, depression, somatization, obsessionality, and anxiety). A three-week test–retest reliability estimate (r) was reported as .97 in a sample of 70 university students (Wear & Pratz, 1987).

504 E. Poloskov, T.J.G. Tracey / Body Image 10 (2013) 501–508

A wit

C p I p b a r w

t C d a r w i m h d u a ( d a e d w c t i v C p v s

a e O ( c i f w t

Fig. 1. Full structural model

ronbach’s alpha of .88 has been reported for the EDI-BD in a sam- le of 209 Mexican American females (Bettendorf & Fischer, 2009).

t should be noted that this measure was slightly modified for the urposes of this study. As we sought to assess the relationship etween site-specific and general evaluations of body, the global ssessment item “I feel satisfied with the shape of my body” was emoved. Cronbach’s alpha for the 8-item measure for this sample as .84.

Global body evaluation. The Multidimensional Body-Self Rela- ions Questionnaire-Appearance Evaluation subscale (MBSRQ-AE; ash, 2000) is a 7-item scale designed to measure satisfaction or issatisfaction with a person’s overall appearance. On items such s “I like my looks just the way they are,” participant responses ange from 1 (definitely disagree) to 5 (definitely agree). Responses ere averaged with lower scores indicative of greater body dissat-

sfaction. However, in order to remain consistent with the other easure of body dissatisfaction, scoring was revised such that

igher scores on the measure were indicative of greater body issatisfaction. Providing evidence of convergent validity among ndergraduates, scores on the MBSRQ-AE were significantly neg- tively correlated with scores from the Body Shape Questionnaire BSQ; Cooper, Taylor, Cooper, & Fairburn, 1987), such that more istress with weight and shape was related to lower appear- nce evaluation (Rosen, Jones, Ramirez, & Waxman, 1998). When xamining the overlap between multiple measures of body image isturbance, Thompson et al. (1994) found that the MBSRQ-AE, hich measures an affective dimension of body dissatisfaction,

learly loaded onto a separate factor than the Appearance Orien- ation subscale of the MBSRQ which assesses cognitive-behavioral nvestment in appearance, thus providing support for discriminant alidity. Frederick, Forbes, Grigorian, and Jarcho (2007) reported ronbach an alpha of .88 for the MBSRQ-AE in a multiethnic sam- le and alphas over .70 for different ethnic subsamples (specific alues for each group unspecified). Cronbach’s alpha in the present ample was .89.

Acculturation. Scale 1 (acculturation scale) of the Accultur- tion Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-II (ARSMA-II; Cuellar t al., 1995) was used. Scale 1 consists of two subscales: the Anglo rientation Scale (AOS, 13 items) and Mexican Orientation Scale

MOS, 17 items). Language use and preference, ethnic identity and lassification, cultural heritage and ethnic behaviors, and ethnic

nteraction are assessed for each orientation. Item responses range rom 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely often/almost always). Responses ere averaged with higher scores indicative of greater accultura-

ion to U.S. and Mexican culture, respectively. Providing evidence

h all paths freely estimated.

for convergent validity, among 317 heterogeneous middle school students, scores on the AOS were significantly correlated with scores on the U.S. Orientation subscale of the Acculturation, Habits, and Interests Multicultural Scale for Adolescents (r = .47; AHIMSA; Unger et al., 2002). A significant relationship was also shown between the MOS and the Other Culture Orientation subscale of the AHIMSA (r = .33; Unger et al., 2002). Cronbach’s alphas of .75 (AOS) and .92 (MOS) were reported in a sample of 94 Mexican Ameri- can female university students (Warren et al., 2010). In a sample of 209 Mexican American female university students, Bettendorf and Fischer (2009) reported Cronbach’s alphas of .69 for AOS and .85 for MOS. Cronbach’s alphas in the present sample were .69 for AOS and .91 for MOS.

Internalization of U.S. standards of beauty. The Sociocul- tural Attitudes Toward Appearance Questionnaire-Internalization subscale (SATAQ-I; Heinberg et al., 1995) is a 8-item self-report questionnaire which measures participants’ endorsement of U.S. culturally sanctioned societal standards of female beauty mainly defined as thinness. On items such as “I wish I looked like a swim suit model,” participant responses can range from 1 (com- pletely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). Responses were averaged with higher scores indicative of greater internalization. Providing evidence of construct validity, Heinberg et al. (1995) reported sig- nificant relationships between the SATAQ-I and numerous widely used measures of body image and eating disturbance. Further, they reported that the SATAQ-I predicted significant variance in body dissatisfaction beyond that accounted for by body mass and self-esteem measures, yielding evidence of incremental validity. Cronbach’s alpha of .86 was reported for the SATAQ-I in a sample of 94 Mexican American university students (Warren et al., 2010). Cronbach’s alpha in the present sample was .84.

Procedures

After approval by the university’s Institutional Review Board, an email that explained the purpose of the study, solicited online or in person participation, and provided a link to the study was sent campus wide to university instructors, department chairs, program coordinators, and cultural student organization lead- ers. People who were sent an email were asked to either allow class/meeting time for the paper-and-pencil administration of the survey or to forward the link to the survey to all students in

their classes, department, program, or student organization. This resulted in a wide range of classes and organizations including education, psychology, business, biology, and Spanish represented in this study. All students were invited to participate; data were

Body Image 10 (2013) 501–508 505

l a w t t w t p p

D

p f h t o T o i m i t i d l

t m d i fi a 9 ( o m v i m h B c & v fi ( S o K d a

P

r e c m i

Table 1 Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations among study variables.

Variable 1 2 3 4 5

1. U.S. 2. Mexican −.39** 3. Internalization .21* −.03 4. Specific .19*−.05 .39** 5. Global −.04 .04 .45** .75** M 3.89 3.70 2.57 3.36 3.31 SD 0.40 0.76 0.95 1.04 0.86

Note. N = 211. U.S.: Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americas II – Anglo Orientation Scale; Mexican: Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americas II – Mexican Orientation Scale; Internalization: Sociocultural Attitude Toward Appear- ance Questionnaire Internalization subscale; Specific: Eating Disorder Inventory Body Dissatisfaction subscale; Global: The Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire Appearance Evaluation scale.

E. Poloskov, T.J.G. Tracey /

ater screened for Mexican American women. Of the classroom dministration, approximately 95% of the students participated; e had no way to assess the online participation rate. Before

he participants were administered the self-report questionnaire, hey were provided with a general rationale for the study. They ere informed that the study concerned body image and factors

hat influence their self-perception. They were assured that their articipation was voluntary and anonymous, and their lack of articipation would not impact their grade.

ata Analysis

Responses were collected from 677 male and female partici- ants. Respondents who did not meet the target criteria (e.g., adult, emale, and Mexican or Mexican American) were excluded. Two undred and fourteen participants met these criteria; however, hree cases were removed because participants had left at least ne measure blank. The final sample consisted of 211 participants. hirty-four participants in the final sample had missing data; 88% f missing data were from online participants and 11% were from n person administration. Of the 34 cases with missing data, 76%

issed only a single item in the entire survey, 15% missed only two tems, 6% missed three items, and one person missed five items on he entire questionnaire. Missing data were estimated using full nformation maximum likelihood (FIML). We also examined the ata set for outliers using Mahalanobis distance values at a p < .001

evel (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001) and found no outliers. Structural equation modeling (SEM) with EQS Structural Equa-

ion Program (Bentler, 1995) was used to test the proposed easurement and structural models. In order to determine if the

ata supported the model, fit indices were calculated. Several fit ndices including the chi-square goodness of fit, the comparative t index (CFI), the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR), nd the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) with a 0% confidence interval (CI) were used to help evaluate the models Hu & Bentler, 1999; Kline, 2005). The chi-square test is a “badness f fit” test such that the larger the chi-square value, the worse the odel corresponds to the data (Kline, 2005, p. 135). The chi-square

alue is sensitive to correlation and sample size and leads to an nflated type I error rate under conditions of multivariate nonnor-

ality (Kline, 2005). As such, the other fit indices mentioned above ave been recommended to supplement the chi-square test (Hu & entler, 1999). Values of the CFI range from 0 to 1.0, with a value lose to 1.0 indicating best fit and cutoff value of close to .95 (Hu Bentler, 1999). Values of the RMSEA range from 0 to 1.0, with a

alue close to .05 indicative of ideal fit, .08 indicative of reasonable t and .10 or more signifying poor fit (Kline, 2005). Hu and Bentler 1999) suggested a cut value of .06 for the RMSEA. Values of the RMR also range from 0 to 1.0 with a value close to .05 indicative f good fit. While Hu and Bentler (1999) suggest a cut off of .08, line (2005) recommends a cut off of .10. We used the chi-square ifference test to determine which of the nested models provided better fit to the data (Kline, 2005).

Results

reliminary Analysis

Table 1 contains the means, standard deviations, and cor- elations among all the scale-level variables in this study. An

xamination of the individual item responses demonstrated con- erns with skewness and kurtosis. We opted for a latent variable odeling approach over a standard path model because of the

ncreased precision due to the examination of disattenuated

* p < .05. ** p < .01.

relations. As such, we used item parcels as a means of estimating the latent constructs.

Parceling is a measurement practice in which multiple observed indicators are used to represent a latent variable (Little, Cunningham, Shahar, & Widaman, 2002). Rather than using indi- vidual item scores as indicators of the latent construct, parceling involves summing or averaging item scores from two or more items from the same scale and using these parcel scores in place of the item score in the analysis to estimate the latent factor (Bandalos, 2008). To address non-normal data of the AOS and MOS and the high number of items of the EDI-BD, three-item parcels were created for the AOS, MOS, and EDI-BD. Because the SATAQ-I and the MBSRQ-AE did not demonstrate violations of normality and because of their small number of individual items, parcels were not created for these two scales. When parceling, all items were entered into an exploratory factor analysis using principal axis factoring for each scale. Done in accordance with recommendations from Hall, Snell, and Foust (1999), parcels were then created by successively com- bining the items with the highest item factor loading with the items with the lowest item factor loading. Examination of the dis- tributional properties of the parcels demonstrated no deviations from normality, so we used maximum likelihood estimation in our subsequent SEM analyses. The internal consistency of each of the parcels ranged from .67 to .89 with a mean value of .80, indicating that each parcel was internally consistent.

Primary Analyses

The first step was to determine if body dissatisfaction was a one- or two-dimensional construct; whether the composite site-specific measure and global dissatisfaction measure were two separate constructs or one construct. To examine this, we tested if the MBSRQ-AE (global dissatisfaction) and the three EDI-BD parcels formed a single factor. The model was not found to fit the data well (CFI = .863, SRMR = .061, and RMSEA = .171 [90% CI: .149–.194], �2(27, N = 211) = 193.56, p < .001). However, the model that sep- arated the two types of scales into different correlated latent variables was found to fit the data well (CFI = .965, SRMR = .039, and RMSEA = .078 [90% CI: .052–.1032], �2(28, N = 211) = 68.019, p < .001). The loglikelihood test of the difference between the mod- els was significant, �2(1, N = 211) = 125.541, p < .0001, indicating that the two-factor model was superior. Given this, we kept the two factor model in examining the relationships among the study variables proposed in Fig. 1. It was hypothesized that (a) orien-

tation toward dominant U.S. culture would relate to both global and composite site-specific body dissatisfaction and internaliza- tion of U.S. beauty standards, and (b) Mexican orientation would be

5 Body I

u c

t a p p i b i s n

d H a p M N fi r m t t t s n s i t h t v

U t s (

T

u t i e T o h fi n s d b

P

i t r i a c c s

06 E. Poloskov, T.J.G. Tracey /

nrelated to body dissatisfaction and internalization of U.S. socio- ultural standards of female beauty.

An examination of the model depicted in Fig. 1 demonstrated hat the model was a good fit to the data (CFI = .956, SRMR = .059, nd RMSEA = .051[90% CI: .039–.062], �2[201, N = 211] = 310.433, < .001). In this model (Model A), there were three significant aths: (a) path C, the path between U.S. orientation and internal-

zation of U.S. standards of female beauty, (b) path G, the path etween internalization and composite site-specific body dissat-

sfaction, and (c) path H, the path between internalization of U.S. tandards of female beauty and global body dissatisfaction. All sig- ificant paths were in the hypothesized direction.

To pare the model down to only the essential paths, we eleted all paths except the three significant paths (C, G, and ; Model B). Overall model fit was good (CFI = .951, SRMR = .065, nd RMSEA = .053 [90% CI: .042–.064], �2[204, N = 211] = 315.618, < .001). The chi-square difference test between the original odel A and pared down Model B was not significant, ��2(3, = 211) = 5.185, p = .0158, indicating that the two models did not t the data differently. Thus, Model B was used as the final rep- esentation of the relationships among the variables as it was ore parsimonious. The standardized parameter estimates and dis-

urbance terms of this model are reported in Fig. 2. There were hree significant paths (a) path C, the path between U.S. orienta- ion and internalization of U.S. standards of female beauty with a tandardized parameter of .200; (b) path G, the path between inter- alization and composite site-specific body dissatisfaction with a tandardized parameter of .457; and (c) path H, the path between nternalization of standards of beauty and global body dissatisfac- ion with a standardized parameter of .510. All paths were in the ypothesized direction (positive). The disturbance terms reflects he unexplained variance of the latent variable by the predictors ariables.

There was also a moderate inverse relationship between .S. orientation and Mexican orientation (standardized parame-

er = −.397), and a strong positive relationship between composite ite-specific body dissatisfaction and global body dissatisfaction standardized parameter = .717).

ests of Mediation

To test for mediation, we used the bootstrapping in Mplus sing 1000 resamplings. The indirect path from U.S. orientation hrough internalization of U.S. female beauty standards to compos- te site-specific body dissatisfaction had a standardized parameter stimate of .091 with a 95% confidence interval of .014–.168. he indirect path from U.S. orientation through internalization f U.S. female beauty standards to general body dissatisfaction ad a standardized parameter estimate of .102; with a 95% con- dence interval of .035–.182. Since both confidence intervals did ot include zero, the indirect effect was significant in each case upporting the mediation role of internalization of beauty stan- ards between U.S. orientation and both composite site-specific ody dissatisfaction and global body dissatisfaction.

ost Hoc Analyses

The site-specific measure of body dissatisfaction is a compos- te of two item ratings of four different body parts: hips, stomach, highs, and buttocks. While our analysis above indicates that these atings were highly related to each other, we also sought to see f the mediation would occur if we used these specific two items

s single indicators of site-specific body dissatisfaction. We repli- ated the testing of model A and B above 4 times supplanting the omposite site-specific measure with one of the specific body dis- atisfactions (i.e., once using the two hips items, once using the two

mage 10 (2013) 501–508

stomach items, once using the two thighs items and once using the two buttocks items). These analyses yielded results that were very similar and with identical conclusions to those above. In each case, internalization was a significant mediator between dominant U.S. orientation and global and single site-specific body dissatisfac- tion. In addition, the magnitude of this mediation was comparable to the results above. Given the similarity of the results and the post hoc basis of these several different analyses, we have cho- sen not to present the results here but they are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Discussion

This study examined the relationships between acculturation, internalization of U.S. sociocultural standards of female beauty and body dissatisfaction among Mexican American female col- lege students. To date, this is the first study which explores these relationships using a multidimensional conceptualization of acculturation and two measures of body dissatisfaction. The two measures of body dissatisfaction were used in order to examine the overlap between two distinct measures that purportedly capture the same construct.

Our examination of the unidimensional nature of body dissat- isfaction versus the separate dimensions of global and composite site-specific body dissatisfaction supported the presence of strongly related but not overlapping dimensions (i.e., findings indi- cated a 56% overlap). The fit of the one dimensional model was much worse than the fit for the two dimensions. The two measures were substantially related (r = .717) but were still conceptually dis- tinct. Perhaps while the measures tap into a similar facet of body dissatisfaction, their unique foci reflect more nuanced components of body dissatisfaction. Given the differences in these two types of body dissatisfaction measures, researchers may want to include both in future research to gain a fuller conceptualization of body dissatisfaction. For both types of body dissatisfaction, internaliza- tion of U.S. standards of female beauty mediated the relationship between U.S. orientation and each type of body dissatisfaction. Hence, it is internalization of U.S. appearance ideals, specifically, that accounts for the link between acculturation to U.S. culture and body dissatisfaction. While past research has demonstrated simi- lar relationships between U.S. orientation and internalization of the thin female ideal with Mexican American samples (Cachelin et al., 2006; Olvera et al., 2005) and between internalization and compos- ite site-specific body dissatisfaction among Latina sorority students (Cashel et al., 2003), no studies have examined internalization as a mediator between acculturation to dominant U.S. culture and body dissatisfaction, so this study provides evidence of internalization’s meditational role.

There is very little research which explicitly examines the rela- tionship between global measures of body dissatisfaction and acculturation. Our results for global body dissatisfaction were similar to those found above for composite site-specific body dis- satisfaction where there was a significant relationship between U.S. orientation and global body dissatisfaction mediated by inter- nalization of U.S. sociocultural standards of female beauty. As hypothesized, greater U.S. orientation predicted greater internal- ization which predicted greater global body dissatisfaction. So, greater adoption of U.S. beliefs, values, and behaviors was related to greater endorsement of U.S. views of female beauty. This makes sense in that it is the endorsement of American beliefs, values, and behaviors which would then lead to internalization of the U.S.

beauty standard. It was this beauty standard that then related to both conceptualizations of body dissatisfaction.

On the contrary, those women who did not adopt U.S. beliefs, values, and behaviors (i.e., low U.S. orientation) also did not adopt

E. Poloskov, T.J.G. Tracey / Body Image 10 (2013) 501–508 507

Fig. 2. Structural model B. Standardized parameter estimates and disturbance terms. D: disturbance term.

t t i s a r

p h t e b i v i o

r b o t s i i a

i o a r a h d

b t M t t v 2 i a c

he U.S. conception of female beauty and thus did not demonstrate he connection between internalization of beauty and body dissat- sfaction. Ultimately, the internalization of the U.S. sociocultural tandard of female beauty was the mediating link between U.S. cculturation and global body dissatisfaction, while there was no elation for Mexican orientation with body dissatisfaction.

We found a generally similar pattern of mediation for both com- osite site-specific and global body dissatisfaction. Past research as shown that composite site-specific and global body dissatisfac- ion are fairly highly related (Forbes & Frederick, 2008; Thompson t al., 1994), we demonstrated that indeed these two measures of ody dissatisfaction are not isomorphic. Further, we also exam-

ned their potentially different pattern of relationships with other ariables. Overall, we found a similar pattern of mediation of nternalization of U.S. standards of female beauty between U.S. rientation and both of the body dissatisfaction measures.

As a post hoc analysis, we also looked at the mediational elationships involving measures of dissatisfaction with specific ody parts separately (i.e., stomach, hips, thighs, and buttocks) as pposed to a composite site-specific measure. The results mirrored hose of the composite measure. This similar pattern of relation- hips and mediation of the specific scales and the composite scale s not surprising given the very high correlation of these different tems in the EDI-BD with the composite, as revealed in our SEM nalysis.

Other significant results in this study were similar to those found n the literature. Internalization of the U.S. sociocultural standard f female beauty was highly related to both composite site-specific nd global body dissatisfaction. This was in keeping with past esearch (Forbes & Jung, 2008; Thompson & Stice, 2001). The more Mexican American college female internalized the unreasonably igh U.S. standard of female beauty, the more likely she was to feel issatisfied with her body.

As hypothesized, there were no significant relationships etween orientation toward Mexican culture and internalization of he U.S. standard of female beauty or between orientation toward

exican culture and either of the measures of body dissatisfac- ion. U.S. and Mexican culture have different standards regarding he ideal female body and different markers for assessing women’s alue (Castillo & Cano, 2007; Gil-Kashiwabara, 2002; Schooler,

008). Our study provided evidence that U.S. orientation and Mex-

can orientation are distinct in the overall acculturation process; n individual can independently endorse both cultures, and both ultures can have different relationship with other variables, these

findings highlight the importance of individually assessing each orientation.

Results from this study have several implications for counseling of Mexican American women. First, it is important for therapists working with Mexican American clients to recognize that this population does in fact experience body image concerns. While Mexican orientation is not related to internalization of U.S. stan- dards of female beauty, it may not be as protective as originally conceived. Everyone in the U.S. is to some degree exposed to U.S. standards of beauty and has the potential for internalizing the stan- dards. When working with Mexican American clients, the clinician should ascertain the client’s level of acculturation, examine the cul- tural (U.S. and Mexican) messages the client receives and explore how these messages impact her body image.

Beyond assessment, cognitive interactive interventions which acknowledge and confront the U.S. standard of female beauty and teach attitudinal change (Stice & Shaw, 2004) are also warranted for Mexican American women. Thompson and Stice (2001) con- tend that the negative effects of internalization can be mitigated through treatment. As such, interventions should be administered that bolster self-esteem, deemphasize body as a central component of self-worth, and confront the unrealistic images society presents.

Our findings should be evaluated in light of this study’s lim- itations. One limitation concerns the lack of generalizability of the results. Participants in this study were women attending a single large predominantly White university. It would be best to expand beyond this single institution and also to those who are not college students. Second, the study was limited because of its use of cross-sectional data. To test causal patterns, longi- tudinal examinations are required. Third, there were limitations related to the administration of the survey. For example, valid- ity questions were not integrated in the online administration to assess for random responding or lack of attention during the survey. Also, the questionnaires were not counterbalanced. These methodological concerns potentially impact the accuracy of the results.

Despite its limitations, this study contributes to the literature in several ways. We found that composite site-specific and global measures of body dissatisfaction assess unique facets of body dis- satisfaction. Additionally, we found that for Mexican American

female college students, it is internalization of U.S. standards of beauty rather than orientation to U.S. culture that is more strongly linked to body dissatisfaction. These findings provide important contextual information in the conceptualization of body image

5 Body I

a i f c t t

B

B

B

B

B

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

C

F

F

F

G

G

G

G

G

G

H

H

08 E. Poloskov, T.J.G. Tracey /

nd related disordered eating concerns. This information in turn mpacts the development of prevention and intervention strategies or Mexican American women with body image and eating disorder oncerns. Specifically, clinicians and researchers should consider argeting and addressing Mexican American women’s internaliza- ion of U.S. standards of beauty.

References

andalos, D. L. (2008). Is parceling really necessary? A comparison of results from item parceling and categorical variable methodology. Structural Equation Mod- eling, 15, 211–240.

entler, P. M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multi- variate Software.

erry, J. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A. M. Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation: Theory, models and some new findings (pp. 9–25). Boulder, CO: Westview.

low, J. A., Taylor, T., Cooper, T. V., & Redfearn, C. K. (2010). Correlates of weight concern and control in a Hispanic college student sample. Eating Behaviors, 11, 6–10.

ettendorf, S. K., & Fischer, A. R. (2009). Cultural strengths as moderators of the rela- tionship between acculturation to the mainstream U.S. society and eating- and body-related concerns among Mexican American women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56, 430–440.

achelin, F. M., Monreal, T. K., & Juarez, L. C. (2006). Body image and size perceptions of Mexican American women. Body Image, 3, 67–75.

afri, G., Yamamiya, Y., Brannick, M., & Thompson, J. K. (2005). The influence of sociocultural factors on body image: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 12, 421–433.

ash, T. F. (2000). The Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire user’s man- ual. Available from the author at. www.bodyimages.com

ashel, M. J., Cunningham, D., Landeros, C., Cokley, K. O., & Muhammad, G. (2003). Sociocultural attitudes and symptoms of bulimia: Evaluating the SATAQ with diverse college groups. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50, 287–296.

astillo, L. G., & Cano, M. A. (2007). Mexican American psychology: Theory and clin- ical application. In C. Negy (Ed.), Cross-cultural psychotherapy: Toward a critical understanding of diverse client populations (2nd ed., pp. 85–102). Reno, NV: Bent Tree Press, Inc.

hoate, L. H. (2005). Toward a theoretical model of women’s body image resilience. Journal of Counseling and Development, 83, 320–330.

ooper, P. J., Taylor, M. J., Cooper, Z., & Fairburn, C. G. (1987). The development and validation of the Body Shape Questionnaire. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 6, 485–494.

randall, C. S., & Martinez, R. (1996). Culture, ideology, and antifat attitudes. Person- ality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1165–1176.

uellar, I., Arnold, B., & Maldonado, R. (1995). Acculturation rating scale for Mex- ican Americans-II: A revision of the original ARSMA scale. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 17, 275–304.

orbes, G. B., & Frederick, D. A. (2008). The UCLA Body Project II: Breast and body dissatisfaction among African, Asian, European, and Hispanic American college women. Sex Roles, 58, 449–457.

orbes, G. B., & Jung, J. (2008). Measures based on sociocultural theory and femi- nist theory as predictors of multidimensional measures of body dissatisfaction among Korean and US college women. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 27, 70–103.

rederick, D. A., Forbes, G. B., Grigorian, K. E., & Jarcho, J. M. (2007). The UCLA Body Project I: Predictors of body satisfaction and appearance surveillance among 2,206 White, Asian, and Hispanic men and women. Sex Roles, 57, 317–327.

ardner, R. M. (2002). Body image assessment of children. In T. F. Cash & T. Pruzin- sky (Eds.), Body image: A handbook of theory, research and clinical practice (pp. 127–134). New York: Guilford.

arner, D. M., Olmsted, M., & Polivy, J. (1983). Development and validation of a multidimensional eating disorder inventory for anorexia nervosa and bulimia. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 2, 15–34.

il-Kashiwabara, E. F. (2002). Body image disturbance and disordered eating in African-American and Latina women. In L. H. Collins, M. R. Dunlap & J. C. Chrisler (Eds.), Charting a new course for feminist psychology (pp. 282–306). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.

owen, L. K., Hayward, C., Killen, J. D., Robinson, T. N., & Taylor, C. B. (1999). Accul- turation and eating disorder symptoms in adolescent girls. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 9, 67–83.

rabe, S., & Hyde, J. S. (2006). Ethnicity and body dissatisfaction among women in the United States: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 622–640.

raves, T. D. (1967). Acculturation, access, and alcohol in a tri-ethnic community. American Anthropologist, 69, 306–321.

all, R. J., Snell, A. F., & Foust, M. S. (1999). Item parceling strategies in SEM: Inves-

tigating the subtle effects of unmodeled secondary constructs. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 233–256.

einberg, L. J., Thompson, J. K., & Stormer, S. (1995). Development and validation of the Sociocultural Attitudes Towards Appearance Questionnaire. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 17, 81–89.

mage 10 (2013) 501–508

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance struc- ture analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

Jackson, L. A. (2002). Physical attractiveness: A sociocultural perspective. In T. F. Cash & T. Pruzinsky (Eds.), Body image: A handbook of theory, research, and clinical practice (pp. 13–21). New York: Guilford Press.

Joiner, G. W., & Kashubeck, S. (1996). Acculturation, body image, self-esteem, and eating-disorder symptomatology in adolescent Mexican American women. Psy- chology of Women Quarterly, 20, 419–435.

Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

Lara, M., Gamboa, C., Kahramanian, M. I., Morales, L. S., & Bautista, D. E. H. (2005). Acculturation and Latino health in the United States: A review of the literature and its sociopolitical context. Annual Review of Public Health, 26, 367–397.

Lester, R., & Petrie, T. A. (1995). Personality and physical correlates of bulimic symptomatology among Mexican American female college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 199–203.

Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173.

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.

Markus, H., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social psychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 299–337.

McCann, C. D. (1992). The psychoanalytic self and the cognitive self: Toward a meet- ing of the minds. Psychological Inquiry, 3, 44–47.

Mussell, M. P., Binford, R. B., & Fulkerson, J. A. (2000). Eating disorders: Summary of risk factors, prevention programming, and prevention research. Counseling Psychologist, 28, 764–796.

Nieri, T., Kulis, S., Keith, V. M., & Hurdle, D. (2005). Body image, acculturation, and substance abuse among boys and girls in the southwest. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 31, 617–639.

Olvera, N., Suminski, R., & Power, T. G. (2005). Intergenerational perceptions of body image in Hispanics: Role of BMI, gender, and acculturation. Obesity Research, 13, 1970–1979.

Perez, M., Voelz, Z. R., Pettit, J. W., & Joiner, T. E., Jr. (2002). The role of acculturative stress and body dissatisfaction in predicting bulimic symptomatology across ethnic groups. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 31, 442–454.

Redfield, R., Linton, R., & Herskovits, M. J. (1936). Memorandum for the study of acculturation. American Anthropologist, 38, 149–152.

Rosen, J. C., Jones, A., Ramirez, E., & Waxman, S. (1998). Body Shape Questionnaire: Studies of validity and reliability. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 20, 315–319.

Santiago-Rivera, A. L., Arredondo, P., & Gallardo-Cooper, M. (2002). Counseling Lati- nos and la familia: A practical guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Schooler, D. (2008). Real women have curves: A longitudinal investigation of TV and the body image development of Latina adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 23, 132–153.

Siever, M. D. (1994). Sexual orientation and gender as factors in socioculturally acquired vulnerability to body dissatisfaction and eating disorders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 252–260.

Stice, E. (2002). Risk and maintenance factors for eating pathology: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 825–848.

Stice, E., & Shaw, H. E. (2004). Eating disorder prevention programs: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 206–227.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Thompson, J. K. (2004). The (mis)measurement of body image: Ten strategies to improve assessment for applied and research purposes. Body Image, 1, 7–14.

Thompson, J. K., Altabe, M. N., Johnson, S., & Stormer, S. (1994). A factor analysis of multiple measures of body image disturbance: Are we all measuring the same construct? International Journal of Eating Disorders, 16, 311–315.

Thompson, J. K., Heinberg, L. J., Altabe, M., & Tantleff-Dunn, S. (1999). Exacting beauty: Theory, assessment, and treatment of body image disturbance. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Thompson, J. K., & Stice, E. (2001). Internalization of the thin-ideal: A potent risk factor for body image and eating disturbances. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 181–183.

Thompson, J. K., van den Berg, P., Roehig, M., Guarda, A. S., & Heinberg, L. J. (2004). The Sociocultural Attitudes Towards Appearance Scale (SATAQ-3): Development and validation. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 35, 293–304.

Tiggemann, M. (2002). Media influences on body image development. In T. F. Cash & T. Pruzinsky (Eds.), Body image: A handbook of theory, research, and clinical practice (pp. 91–98). New York: Guilford Press.

Unger, J. B., Gallaher, P., Shakib, S., Ritt-Olson, A., Palmer, P. H., & Johnson, C. A. (2002). The AHIMSA acculturation scale: A new measure of acculturation for adolescents in a multicultural society. Journal of Early Adolescence, 22, 225–251.

Warren, C. S., Castillo, L. G., & Gleaves, D. H. (2010). The sociocultural model of eating disorders in Mexican American women: Behavioral acculturation and cogni- tive marginalization as moderators. Eating Disorders: The Journal of Treatment & Prevention, 18, 43–57.

Wear, R. W., & Pratz, O. (1987). Test–retest reliability for the Eating Disorder Inven- tory. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 6, 767–769.

Wildes, J. E., Emery, R. E., & Simons, A. D. (2001). The roles of ethnicity and culture in the development of eating disturbance and body dissatisfaction: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 21, 521–551.