The Real Ideal: Misestimation of Body Mass Index.

In Western cultures, the ideal body for women is thin and toned. Idealization of thinness has led many women to desire bodies with an underweight body mass index (BMI). The present study investigated women's knowledge of BMI, particularly relating to their own body ideals, to determine whether women knowingly idealize bodies categorized as "underweight." In August 2020, one-hundred and forty-seven US women aged 18 to 25 completed two online tasks in a repeated-measures design. First, participants estimated the BMIs of a series of bodies. Then, participants selected representations of their own and ideal bodies from a figure rating scale and estimated the BMIs of their selections. Participants generally mis-estimated the BMI of bodies, but did so to a greater extent when viewing bodies as an extension of their own, i.e., following the figure rating scale task. Further, if participants selected an underweight or overweight ideal body, they were likely to estimate this body was within a "normal" weight BMI range, demonstrating that women who idealize underweight-or overweight-bodies do so unknowingly. These findings suggest misperceptions of women's own ideal body size are often greater than misperceptions of other bodies, potentially driving the tendency to idealize underweight bodies.

The role of social context in own body size estimations: An investigation of the body schema.

Women tend to overestimate their body size, including space needed to pass through gaps/apertures. These results were generated using static apertures resembling doorways. However, body image is influenced by other bodies around us, and how estimations of passability may be influenced by social context is unknown. To investigate, a series of apertures were created comprising two women facing each other, with the space between creating the 'doorway'. The apertures were created using either two larger-bodied or two smaller-bodied women. Non-social versions were generated using the social aperture silhouettes. Thirty-four undergraduate women viewed a series of apertures - varying in width relative to their own size - and judged whether they believed they could pass through them. State and trait body dissatisfaction measurements were also taken. Point of subjective equality (PSE) data suggested that participants did not overestimate the space needed to pass through apertures overall, but showed an overestimation of space for the larger-bodied social doorways. Correlations suggested higher levels of state body dissatisfaction associated with higher PSEs, but only in the social conditions. Results showed that participants may have been engaging in different mechanisms regarding social versus non-social doorways, and the importance of social context when investigating own body size estimations.

The ever-changing ideal: The body you want depends on who else you're looking at.

The body positivity movement-celebrating bodies beyond the thin ideal-has gained traction on social media. In an online study of North American women, we aimed to determine how ideal body perceptions shift based on the presentation of more diverse body types. In Study 1, women (n = 115, aged 19-75) responded to arrays of bodies ranging from primarily small to primarily large bodies, selecting the body closest to their ideal body. Results showed that the BMI of the ideal body increased as the body sizes in the array increased. Participants were also less likely to select an underweight ideal when viewing larger bodies. In Study 2, women responded to arrays with either primarily small (n = 132, aged 20-68) or primarily large (n = 130, aged 20-75) bodies. Results suggested that ideal body perceptions only shifted around current societal standards, and not to extremes. The participants presented with the larger-bodied arrays were more likely to select a normal weight ideal body than those who saw the smaller-bodied arrays. Results suggest ideal body size is malleable, and shifting toward a more diverse perception of the ideal body is achievable with increased exposure beyond the thin ideal.

Representational pseudoneglect for detecting changes to Rey-Osterrieth figures.

When dividing attention between the left and right sides of physical space, most individuals pay slightly more attention to the left side. This phenomenon, known as pseudoneglect, may also occur for the left and right sides of mental representations of stimuli. Representational pseudoneglect has been shown for the recall of real-world scenes and for simple, briefly presented stimuli. The current study sought to investigate the effect of exposure duration and complexity using adaptations of the Rey-Osterrieth figures. Undergraduates (n = 97) were shown a stimulus for 20 s and asked to remember it. Participants were then shown a probe and indicated whether it was the same or different. Results showed that, irrespective of whether an element was added or subtracted, changes on the left side of the remembered image were better detected. These results are consistent with representational pseudoneglect and demonstrate that this effect occurs for complex stimuli when presented for an extended period of time. Representation neglect is therefore unlikely to be the result of an initial saccade to the left-but could be related to the formation or recall of the representation.

The influence of baseline directional differences in pseudoneglect on distractibility.

Neurologically normal individuals demonstrate a reliable bias to the left side of space, known as pseudoneglect. The magnitude of this attentional asymmetry varies, depending on factors such as location within the visual field. Prior research has shown that the presence of distractors in the upper visual field increase leftward biases. The current study investigated whether brief distractors in the periphery, which recruit exogenous attention influence the strength of pseudoneglect. In addition, to further investigate the interaction of vertical and horizontal attentional asymmetries, a vertical landmark task with horizontally presented distractors was also performed. Experiment 1 findings illustrated that single visual field distractors led to stronger leftward biases, when compared to dual visual field distractors. Results also indicated that upward biases for vertical lines were unchanged by horizontal distractors. A baseline landmark task was included in Experiment 2 to allow for participants to be separated into left- and right-responder groups. Results showed that upper space distractors increased the magnitude of asymmetries scores depending on the baseline direction. Left-responders showed increased leftward biases and right-responders showed increased rightward biases when distractors were presented in upper space. As in Experiment 1, horizontal distractors did not influence upward biases. Furthermore, horizontal and vertical asymmetries were not correlated in either experiment. The current results demonstrate a novel influence of distractors on individual differences in pseudoneglect, which is consistent with the suggestion that a subset of individuals show reliable rightward biases. This highlights the importance of accounting for baseline attentional asymmetries.