Show simple item record

[journal article]

dc.contributor.authorVoges, Mona M.de
dc.contributor.authorGiabbiconi, Claire-Mariede
dc.contributor.authorSchöne, Benjaminde
dc.contributor.authorWaldorf, Manuelde
dc.contributor.authorHartmann, Andrea S.de
dc.contributor.authorVocks, Siljade
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-19T07:27:14Z
dc.date.available2021-05-19T07:27:14Z
dc.date.issued2019de
dc.identifier.issn1664-1078de
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/73109
dc.description.abstractGenerally speaking, compared to women, men are less dissatisfied with their own body and consider themselves to be better-looking and less overweight. So far, however, it is unclear whether these divergent body ratings arise from the application of double standards. With the present study, we examined whether men apply different standards to their own body than to other men’s bodies and whether they differ from women in this regard. To this aim, we presented n = 104 women and n = 93 men with pictures of thin, average-weight, overweight, athletic and hypermuscular male and female bodies on a computer screen. To manipulate identification, we showed the bodies of the respective participant’s gender once with the participant’s own face and once with the face of another person. Identity cues, such as faces, might activate different body schemata, which influence body ratings and thus lead to the application of double standards. Participants were instructed to rate their emotional reaction to the bodies according to valence and arousal, and to rate the bodies with respect to attractiveness, body fat, and muscle mass. The application of double standards was determined by calculating the difference between the rating of a body presented with the participant’s face and the rating of the same body presented with another person’s face. Both women and men showed self-deprecating double standards in valence, body attractiveness, body fat and muscle mass for the overweight body. Men also revealed self-deprecating double standards for the thin, average-weight and hypermuscular bodies, but evaluated the athletic body as more attractive and with a higher positive feeling when it was presented with their own face. Women did not show any self-serving double standards and showed fewer self-deprecating double standards than men. The results indicate that men devalue non-ideal bodies and upvalue ideal bodies when they are self-related, whereas women more rate in a fair-minded manner. Thus, in contrast to women, an advantage for men may be that they are able to self-enhance in the case of desirable bodies. This ability to self-enhance regarding desirable features might be beneficial for men’s self-worth and body satisfaction.de
dc.languageende
dc.subject.ddcSozialwissenschaften, Soziologiede
dc.subject.ddcSocial sciences, sociology, anthropologyen
dc.subject.otherbody evaluation; gender difference; double standardsde
dc.titleGender Differences in Body Evaluation: Do Men Show More Self-Serving Double Standards Than Women?de
dc.description.reviewbegutachtet (peer reviewed)de
dc.description.reviewpeer revieweden
dc.source.journalFrontiers in Psychology
dc.source.volume10de
dc.publisher.countryCHE
dc.subject.classozFrauen- und Geschlechterforschungde
dc.subject.classozWomen's Studies, Feminist Studies, Gender Studiesen
dc.subject.thesozperceptionen
dc.subject.thesozSchönheitde
dc.subject.thesozKörperbildde
dc.subject.thesozgeschlechtsspezifische Faktorende
dc.subject.thesozWahrnehmungde
dc.subject.thesozevaluationen
dc.subject.thesozMoralde
dc.subject.thesozFraude
dc.subject.thesozbeautyen
dc.subject.thesozbody imageen
dc.subject.thesozMannde
dc.subject.thesozwomanen
dc.subject.thesozmoralityen
dc.subject.thesozgender-specific factorsen
dc.subject.thesozmanen
dc.subject.thesozBewertungde
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Attribution 4.0en
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Namensnennung 4.0de
ssoar.contributor.institutionFDBde
internal.statusformal und inhaltlich fertig erschlossende
internal.identifier.thesoz10042805
internal.identifier.thesoz10074297
internal.identifier.thesoz10041491
internal.identifier.thesoz10040719
internal.identifier.thesoz10038633
internal.identifier.thesoz10036171
internal.identifier.thesoz10079363
internal.identifier.thesoz10045237
dc.type.stockarticlede
dc.type.documentjournal articleen
dc.type.documentZeitschriftenartikelde
dc.source.pageinfo1-12de
internal.identifier.classoz20200
internal.identifier.journal790
internal.identifier.document32
internal.identifier.ddc300
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00544de
dc.description.pubstatusPublished Versionen
dc.description.pubstatusVeröffentlichungsversionde
internal.identifier.licence16
internal.identifier.pubstatus1
internal.identifier.review1
internal.pdf.wellformedtrue
internal.pdf.encryptedfalse
ssoar.urn.registrationfalsede


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record