FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W65302361> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W65302361 startingPage "43" @default.
• W65302361 abstract "In the United States, the ideal appearance for both men and women is simply defined as young, fit, and thin (Becker, Diedrichs, Jankowski, & Werchan, 2013). Focus on the value of the idealized body is associated with habitual concern over one's appearance (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). One manifestation of such concern is body a general term encompassing discussion about one's physical appearance (Engeln, Sladek, & Waldron, 2013). Body talk which focuses on weight (fat talk) is common, especially among White women, and may have both positive and negative consequences (Britton, Martz, Bazzini, Curtin, & LeaShomb, 2006). Although it has been less commonly studied, negative body talk has been identified in men (Engeln, et al, 2013) and may vary by ethnicity (Nichter, 2000). Our study experimentally examines the effects of negative body talk, specifically fat talk, on college men and women at a Historically Black University. Both men and women frequently engage in negative body talk (Engeln, et al, 2013). Women tend to display fat talk as a type of negative body talk (Nichter, 2000). Fat talk typically follows a rigid script in which one woman makes a self-depreciating comment about her weight (e.g, I look so fat in these jeans). A second woman then denies that comment's truth, usually followed by making her own self-depreciating comment (No, your butt's not big. Check out my muffin-top). Among men, negative body talk also occurs, but tends to be less ritualized, less fat-focused, and more muscle-focused. Men also tend to make more positive comments about their bodies than women (Engeln, et al, 2013). Negative body talk is a common topic of conversation, especially among women (Martz, Petroff, Curtin, & Bazzini, 2009; Salk & Engeln-Maddox, 2011). In an age-diverse sample of women, 81% reported at least occasional fat talk, with 33% reporting frequent engagement in fat talk. Negative body talk is so socially normal that it can be considered unacceptable not to engage in it (Britton et al., 2006; Nichter, 2000). Nichter (2000) suggested that fat talk has the positive function of enhancing social cohesion, especially among White women and girls. Abiding by the social norms of engaging in fat talk helps women and girls to fit in, and provides inter-connectedness between them. Britton et al. (2006) showed that women responding to vignettes rated other women who self-deprecate as more likable than those who did not, showing that self-deprecation may be expressed as a way to appear humble and likeable. Nichter (2000) hypothesized that involvement in fat talk can be compelling since it is considered rude or conceited to fail to respond to fat talk. Researchers have emphasized the need to examine ethnic comparisons in body talk research (Clarke, Murnen, & Smolak, 2010; Engeln, et al, 2013). Nichter (2000) explored the role of ethnicity in frequency of fat talk in a series of interviews with middle and high school girls. African American girls reported less concern over weight and lower frequency of fat talk. Nichter (2000) reported that the African American concept of beauty encompassed more than simple physical appearance, and included exhibiting a positive attitude and confidence. However, Engeln-Maddox, Salk, and Miller (2012) found no ethnic differences in frequency of fat talk or body concerns among White, African American, Asian, and Latina college women. Given the inconsistent findings in the literature, more research with ethnically diverse samples is warranted. Although consequences of negative body talk may sometimes be positive in promoting social cohesion, research has suggested harmful effects with respect to body attitudes and eating pathology. Correlational studies have shown that fat talk is reliably associated with eating pathology in college (Engeln-Maddox et al., 2012; Clarke et al., 2010) and non-college (Becker et al., 2013) populations. …" @default.
• W65302361 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W65302361 creator A5004316579 @default.
• W65302361 creator A5061497417 @default.
• W65302361 creator A5070945281 @default.
• W65302361 date "2014-03-01" @default.
• W65302361 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W65302361 title "The effects of negative body talk in an ethnically diverse sample of college students." @default.
• W65302361 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W65302361 type Work @default.
• W65302361 sameAs 65302361 @default.
• W65302361 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W65302361 countsByYear W653023612015 @default.
• W65302361 countsByYear W653023612018 @default.
• W65302361 countsByYear W653023612020 @default.
• W65302361 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W65302361 hasAuthorship W65302361A5004316579 @default.
• W65302361 hasAuthorship W65302361A5061497417 @default.
• W65302361 hasAuthorship W65302361A5070945281 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C104317684 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C137403100 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C19165224 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C2776639384 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C2994224047 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C56273599 @default.
• W65302361 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C104317684 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C137403100 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C144024400 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C15744967 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C17744445 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C185592680 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C19165224 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C199539241 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C2776639384 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C2994224047 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C55493867 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C56273599 @default.
• W65302361 hasConceptScore W65302361C77805123 @default.
• W65302361 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W65302361 hasLocation W653023611 @default.
• W65302361 hasOpenAccess W65302361 @default.
• W65302361 hasPrimaryLocation W653023611 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W137501152 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W14165121 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W1903635328 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W1957042759 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W1972684617 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W1996329893 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2009995660 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2011850887 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2020753711 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2029074489 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2046945406 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2056230441 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2162446574 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2183952240 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2296062111 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2557194676 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2563418442 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2564149300 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W2916328239 @default.
• W65302361 hasRelatedWork W292709396 @default.
• W65302361 hasVolume "16" @default.
• W65302361 isParatext "false" @default.
• W65302361 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W65302361 magId "65302361" @default.
• W65302361 workType "article" @default.