The article writers advertised the exam-retest reliability because: Roentgen

The article writers advertised the exam-retest reliability because: Roentgen

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 (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-stages 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 is actually mentioned because of the Losing weight Size of the Dinner Thinking Test (EAT) (Garner, Olmsted, Bohr & Garfinkel, 1982), composed of sixteen comments obtained to the a good six-point measure (never ever = 0/always = 5), with high score exhibiting an advanced level of controlled food. On Eat psychometrical characteristics get a hold of Garner et al. (1982). The structure coefficient for both samples, the Mexican and you may German of these, is of the identical worthy of, a leader out-of 0.76.

Weightloss restraint

Ineffectiveness scale. The fresh bad apply to grounds are estimated through the Ineffectiveness Level out of this new Dining Problems List (EDI) (Gather et al., 1983), which has shown a convergent legitimacy (ineffectiveness/self esteem ) out-of Roentgen = 0.70 (p

Medical personnel got the weight and height steps

Body mass index (BMI). Body mass index was computed because lbs in the kilograms separated by the top within the square m (Bmi = kg/m2).

Ahead of analysis range, a great airplane pilot examination of new Silhouettes Measure (Profile 1), put https://kissbrides.com/es/mujeres-solteras/ on an example composed of 20 North american country youngsters, was applied to test brand new appropriateness of your own rates so you can represent muscles models, so you can corroborate an effective acceptation out of a not known gang of silhouettes and a definite knowledge of the newest advice (new German group currently counted which have investigation within this respect). The outcomes showed the brand new Silhouette Scale try a great or a keen compatible instrument to your North american country shot.

The brand new detectives of the two places, in the Mexico Area as well as Hae (standardized) processes. The brand new surveys had been applied to categories of medical and you can breastfeeding students within Mexican and you may Italian language universities. One of the reasons at the rear of the ples regarding people connected with medication is only the focus that (one can assume) these young adults need to have to the medical occupation as well as health issues, causing them to far more responsive to difficulties like ED. Told consent is obtained from all the study players. Every contacted children accessible to participate. The brand new respective regional integrity committees recognized the latest non-invasive processes. Professional translators undertook and you can controlled new interpretation and you can retranslation of your own devices.

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

Leave a comment

อีเมลของคุณจะไม่แสดงให้คนอื่นเห็น ช่องข้อมูลจำเป็นถูกทำเครื่องหมาย *