Differences in Body Image Preoccupation Following Online Exposure to Fitspiration and Thinspiration Images

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Differences in body image preoccupation following online exposure to fitspiration and Thinspiration Images: A Gender and Media Study

Summary

This study examined the influence of the online exposure to fitspiration and thinspiration images on body image preoccupation in women and men. I find this study interesting, especially because it introduces a different perspective to what is commonly known in the literature on gender differences in body image, by suggesting a reverse trend when body image preoccupation. The study shows that men exhibit greater body image preoccupation than women following the online exposure to fitspiration and thinspiration images. I could have argued the veracity of that finding. However, I have a few issues that I would like to highlight.

General Comments

I thought the title was long, and the second part should be removed.

Can you consider the following?

1. Exploring gender differentials in body image preoccupation following online exposure to online fitspiration and thinspiration images

OR

1. Differences in body image preoccupation following online exposure to fitspiration and thinspiration images

I think the addition of “A Gender and Media Study” to the title is a bit redundant. It has already been expressed in the main title.

Set apart the theoretical framework. You needed to do more than merely mention the theory (see Lines 52, etc). The Tripartite Influence Model is an interesting one and is suitable for the study. Let us know the origin, explain the concepts, how it connects to the problem, how it guides the variables, and how it shaped your research objectives. Do not forget to integrate the theory into your discussion

How did variables like frequency of exposure to these images, level of education, employment n and other intervening variables explain or control the relationship between exposure and body image preoccupation?

The methodology section is long and too descriptive.

Specific Comments

Lines 9-10: preoccupation in women and men, and 2) to explore the influence

Lines 108-109 are vague or not well punctuated. An experimental ecological momentary assessment study has investigated the fitspiration and thinspiration exposure on men’s body image. It was found that viewing fitspiration, compared to neutral images, increased state body fat dissatisfaction.

Line 157: “affected” should be “affect.” It is a proposition

Line 158: types of images; and 2)

Line 159: “affected” should be “affect.” It is a proposition

Lines 169 – 172: The authors noted that interested subjects were informed to contact the study by phone or e-mail to complete a screening to determine their eligibility, and the screening involved a 50-minute clinical interview conducted by a psychologist in a room of an Italian University. My question is (1) was it incentivised? I don’t understand what would motivate about 300 people to gather for a 50-minute clinical interview conducted by a psychologist in a room, only to examine their eligibility for a study on the impact of social media image exposure on their body image preoccupation. That would be unprecedented if it happened.

Line 247: This is curious. In a study set in Italy, and the set of images include those from Caucasian, Asian, and African American ethnicities? I am wondering if these are the predominant ethnicities in the social media space in Italy, or if there is another justification?

Line 256: Post-test is done 20 minutes after pretest? That is actually standard experimental time, but it is limited because it only measures the short-term impact of exposure to these mages.  

Meanwhile, justify the 20-minute interval between pretest and posttest in the methodology section.

Lines 266 – 269: The number of images is not consistent with what you have in Lines 243 – 245.

Line 333: What do you mean by the “variable groups”?

Line 344: men; and 2)

Line 355: The authors had earlier said that fitspiration studies are relatively fewer (Line 108)

Lines 36 – 366 is not clearly stated.

Author Response

Dear editor,

We thank you for the opportunity to review our manuscript and thank the reviewers for their suggestions and comments. Please, see the reviewed version of the manuscript with changes highlighted in light blue in the text of the manuscript.

Reviewer 1

Summary

This study examined the influence of the online exposure to fitspiration and thinspiration images on body image preoccupation in women and men. I find this study interesting, especially because it introduces a different perspective to what is commonly known in the literature on gender differences in body image, by suggesting a reverse trend when body image preoccupation. The study shows that men exhibit greater body image preoccupation than women following the online exposure to fitspiration and thinspiration images. I could have argued the veracity of that finding. However, I have a few issues that I would like to highlight.

General Comments

I thought the title was long, and the second part should be removed.

Can you consider the following?

1. Exploring gender differentials in body image preoccupation following online exposure to online fitspiration and thinspiration images

OR

1. Differences in body image preoccupation following online exposure to fitspiration and thinspiration images

I think the addition of “A Gender and Media Study” to the title is a bit redundant. It has already been expressed in the main title.

Reply: we thank you for your suggestion, we chose the second title and modified it in the text of the manuscript.

Set apart the theoretical framework. You needed to do more than merely mention the theory (see Lines 52, etc). The Tripartite Influence Model is an interesting one and is suitable for the study. Let us know the origin, explain the concepts, how it connects to the problem, how it guides the variables, and how it shaped your research objectives. Do not forget to integrate the theory into your discussion

Reply: as suggested, in the introduction section of the manuscript we specified the origin of the Tripartite Influence Model, explained the concepts and how it connects to problem as follows: “The Tripartite Influence Model (TIM) was originally proposed by Thompson, Heinberg, Altabe, and TantleffDunn to explain the development of body image disturbance and eating pathology. The TIM also provided a robust theoretical framework for understanding the impact of sociocultural influences on body image, identifying three primary sources of appearance-related pressure: media, peers, and family (Thompson et al., 1999). According to this model, media, peers, and family exert appearance-related pressures that promote culturally valued body ideals, such as thinness for women and muscularity for men. These pressures contribute to two central mediating processes: internalization of appearance ideals and appearance-based social comparison. Internalization refers to the extent to which individuals cognitively adopt societal standards of physical beauty, whereas social comparison involves evaluating one’s appearance against that of others (Roberts et al., 2022). These processes, in turn, increase vulnerability to body dissatisfaction, body image preoccupation, and related maladaptive outcomes. Greater exposure to sociocultural pressures, such as idealized and thin body images, can exacerbate body dissatisfaction by increasing the perceived discrepancy between one’s actual and ideal physical appearance (Castellanos, & Steins, 2023)”. In the current study section, we explained how the Tripartite Influence  Model guided the variables, and how it shaped our research objectives as follows: “The present study focused on the impact of online exposure to fitspiration and thinspiration images, a contemporary and highly salient form of media influence. Social media platforms intensify and personalize appearance-related content, potentially amplifying sociocultural pressures described by the TIM. Fitspiration and thinspiration images often idealize extreme thinness, leanness, and muscularity, making them particularly relevant to the internalization mechanisms proposed by the model. Thus, the TIM offers a coherent explanation of how repeated exposure to such content may in-crease body image preoccupation in both women and men” (…) “The TIM directly guided the selection of the study variables. Online exposure to fitspiration and thinspiration images was conceptualized as a specific manifestation of social media influence. Body image preoccupation was identified as a primary out-come variable consistent with the model’s emphasis on body-related concerns. Furthermore, appearance-related pressures and internalization of aesthetic ideals from family, peers, and traditional media were included as theoretically grounded variables, reflecting the tripartite sources of influence outlined in the model”. As suggested, we integrated the theory into the discussion as follows: “In line with the TIM’s assumptions, the findings of this study confirmed that appearance-based pressures from parents and media contribute to body image preoccupation in different levels (increase or decrease) among women and men. Our findings didn’t confirm appearance-based pressures from peers both in women and men. Probably, the pressure from peers has a greater influence in adolescents and not in young adults which were the sample of this study (Jarman et al., 2020).With reference to the mechanism of TIM, our findings demonstrated that online exposure to fitspiration and thinspiration images contributed to internalization of appearance ideals in women and men, but only the internalization of the muscled ideals showed an increase”.

How did variables like frequency of exposure to these images, level of education, employment n and other intervening variables explain or control the relationship between exposure and body image preoccupation?

Reply: to mitigate the effect of intervening variables, we checked the gender distribution within the education levels and employment was proportionally distributed between men and women. As regard to frequency of online exposure to fitspiration and thinspiration images, we checked that the social media usage was homogenous and similar among the final sample, and we excluded subjects with Internet Addiction.

The methodology section is long and too descriptive.

Specific Comments

Lines 9-10: preoccupation in women and men, and 2) to explore the influence

Reply: we modified it.

Lines 108-109 are vague or not well punctuated. An experimental ecological momentary assessment study has investigated the fitspiration and thinspiration exposure on men’s body image. It was found that viewing fitspiration, compared to neutral images, increased state body fat dissatisfaction.

Reply: we better wrote the sentence as follows: “A study has investigated the fitspiration and thinspiration exposure on men’s body image using an ecological momentary assessment (EMA). All participants were required to install the InstantSurvey app, which, over a seven-day period, sent six notifications per day at semi-random intervals between 8:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m., prompting participants to complete brief one-minute assessments (i.e. EMA). At each EMA, participants were randomly assigned to one of the three images (fitspiration, thinspiration, or neutral). It was found that viewing fitspiration compared to neutral images increased state body fat dissatisfaction; whereas viewing thinspiration compared to neutral images reduced both state body fat and muscularity dissatisfaction (Yee et al., 2020).”

Line 157: “affected” should be “affect.” It is a proposition

Reply: we modified it.

Line 158: types of images; and 2)

Reply: we modified it.

Line 159: “affected” should be “affect.” It is a proposition

Reply: we modified it.

Lines 169 – 172: The authors noted that interested subjects were informed to contact the study by phone or e-mail to complete a screening to determine their eligibility, and the screening involved a 50-minute clinical interview conducted by a psychologist in a room of an Italian University. My question is (1) was it incentivised? I don’t understand what would motivate about 300 people to gather for a 50-minute clinical interview conducted by a psychologist in a room, only to examine their eligibility for a study on the impact of social media image exposure on their body image preoccupation. That would be unprecedented if it happened.

Reply: No, the clinical interview wasn’t incentivised, it aimed to exclude the presence of psychological, neurological or other disorders, such as Internet Addiction, in participants. In the manuscript we wrote this sentence: “During the screening, participants were asked demographic and psychiatric questions to gather information about their health condition and socioeconomic status, and they compiled two self-report questionnaires, respectively, to assess Internet Use Disorder and to measure the amount of time participants spent using Facebook and Instagram, the frequency of posting and type of their posts”.

Line 247: This is curious. In a study set in Italy, and the set of images include those from Caucasian, Asian, and African American ethnicities? I am wondering if these are the predominant ethnicities in the social media space in Italy, or if there is another justification?

Reply: yes, there is another justification. The set of images include those from Caucasian, Asian, and African American ethnicities due to ethics, inclusion and global use of Instagram reasons. All participants had Italian Nationality, but it is possible that someone could have different ethnic origins. However, the most important reason was that Instagram is a truly global platform, consequently participants can be exposure to online fitspiration and thinspiration from different ethnicities.

Line 256: Post-test is done 20 minutes after pretest? That is actually standard experimental time, but it is limited because it only measures the short-term impact of exposure to these mages.  

Meanwhile, justify the 20-minute interval between pretest and posttest in the methodology section.

Reply: no, post-test is done 30 minutes after pretest, because the experimental phase was long 20 minutes, and after this phase, participants were given the opportunity to take a short break (10 minutes) to mitigate any potential effects of fatigue or tiredness.

Lines 266 – 269: The number of images is not consistent with what you have in Lines 243 – 245.

Reply: We apologize for this clerical error. We corrected it

Line 333: What do you mean by the “variable groups”?

Reply: the “variable groups” refers to two groups (males vs females) involved in this study

Line 344: men; and 2)

Reply: we modified it.

Line 355: The authors had earlier said that fitspiration studies are relatively fewer (Line 108)

Reply: we modified the sentence as follows: “However, it is challenging to interpret these findings in comparison with previous results, as the majority of past research has primarily examined body image and body dissatisfaction in relation to the online exposure to fitspiration and thinspiration images, whereas body image preoccupation has not been sufficiently investigated, as stated in the introduction of this paper”.

Lines 36 – 366 is not clearly stated.

Reply: we thank you for your observation, we better specified that the result and new prospective are not clearly stated as follows: “However, caution is needed to interpret this finding, because it is just not clearly stated”.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript provides a valuable contribution to understanding gender differences in body image preoccupation following exposure to online fitspiration and thinspiration content. The study design is clear, and the instruments used are validated. However, there are significant issues regarding the clarity of constructs, demographic data consistency, and ethical compliance that must be addressed before publication.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear editor,

We thank you for the opportunity to review our manuscript and thank the reviewers for their suggestions and comments. Please, see the reviewed version of the manuscript with changes highlighted in light blue in the text of the manuscript.

Reviewer 2

The manuscript provides a valuable contribution to understanding gender differences in body image preoccupation following exposure to online fitspiration and thinspiration content. The study design is clear, and the instruments used are validated. However, there are significant issues regarding the clarity of constructs, demographic data consistency, and ethical compliance that must be addressed before publication.

1. Conceptual Clarity (Preoccupation vs. Dissatisfaction): The study focuses on "body image preoccupation" as the primary outcome measure (using BSQ-14). However, the Introduction relies heavily on literature discussing "body dissatisfaction" and general "body image concerns." These are distinct constructs.

Correction: In Section 1.1 or 1.2, please explicitly differentiate between:

▪ Body dissatisfaction (affective evaluation/discontent).

▪ Body image preoccupation (obsessive thoughts/rumination).

▪ Body image (perceptual/subjective view).

Explain why "preoccupation" was chosen as the specific variable for this study and how it differs from the more commonly studied "dissatisfaction."

Reply: as suggested, in the section 1.2 we explicitly differentiated constructs, we explained the underlying reasons of choice of preoccupation as the specific variable and how it differs from the dissatisfaction. Please, see the following sentence: “However, body image, body dissatisfaction and body image preoccupation are distinct constructs (Askew et al., 2020; Mitchison et al., 2017; Valutis et al., 2009). Body image refers to an individual’s internal representation of their body, how they perceive, interpret, and mentally picture their physical appearance. This construct is primarily descriptive and representational, not inherently emotional or evaluative. Body dissatisfaction reflects the emotional and evaluative response to one’s body image, specifically, negative feelings or discontent with appearance (Karazsia et al., 2013). This construct captures how someone feels about their body, but not how frequently or intrusively they think about it (Heider et al., 2018). Body image preoccupation refers to the degree of cognitive salience and persistence of appearance-related thoughts, how often, intrusively, and uncontrollably individuals think about their body. This construct is fundamentally cognitive and process-oriented, emphasizing mental occupation rather than emotional evaluation. Body image preoccupation was selected as the specific variable for the present study because this study focused on cognitive engagement with appearance, rather than emotional valence alone (Goldfein et al., 2000). Unlike dissatisfaction, which captures negative evaluation, preoccupation reflects the intensity, persistence, and intrusiveness of body-related thoughts. This distinction is critical because individuals may experience high preoccupation without extreme dissatisfaction. In addition, this study prioritized cognitive burden and attentional capture, which dissatisfaction alone cannot adequately represent. Hence, body image preoccupation was chosen as the specific variable for this study because it reflects a central cognitive mechanism underlying body image disturbance, one that operates independently of emotional evaluation and offers greater explanatory power for behavioural and psychological outcomes than body dissatisfaction alone”.

2. Data Inconsistencies in Table 1: There is a significant error in Table 1 regarding the sample size. The total sample is reported as N = 238.

Under "Employment," the sum of Unemployed (7) and Employees (207) is 214, leaving 24 participants unaccounted for.

Please verify all numbers and ensure the "Employment" section adds up to the total N.

Reply: We apologize for this mistake. We inserted the corrected total N for employment section.

Additionally, please clarify the gender distribution within the education levels (are the 223 Bachelor's degrees proportionally distributed between men and women?).

Reply: yes, the 223 Bachelor’s degrees are proportionally distributed between men and women as follows: females N= 112 and male N= 111.

3. Threat to Internal Validity (The 10-Minute Break): The procedure mentions a 10-minute break between exposure and post-test. It is crucial to specify what participants did during this break. Did they have access to their smartphones? If participants used social media during this break, it would contaminate the immediate effects of the experimental stimuli.

Please clarify the control conditions during this break in the Methods section.

Reply: we thank you for your observation. No, participants didn’t have access to their smartphone. During the break, participants could only drink water or use the toilets. As suggested: we clarified the control conditions during the break as follows: “After the experimental phase, participants were given the opportunity to take a short break (10 minutes) to mitigate any potential effects of fatigue or tiredness; moreover, participants gave their smartphones to the examiner to avoid the smartphone usage during the break. During the break, participants could only drink water or use the toilets”.

4. Ethical Compliance (MDPI Requirement): The manuscript does not explicitly state whether the study received approval from an Institutional Review Board (Ethics Committee) or if Informed Consent was obtained from participants. Requirement: In accordance with MDPI guidelines, please add an "Institutional Review Board Statement" and an "Informed Consent Statement" at the end of the manuscript, including the approval code and date if applicable.

Reply: we inserted all sections of Ethical Compliance in accordance with MDPI guidelines.

5. Practical Implications: Lines 407-409 mention the importance of "media literacy" generally. Please provide specific, actionable recommendations for educators or practitioners based on your findings (e.g., what specific aspect of literacy helps reduce preoccupation?).

Reply: we provided specific and actionable recommendations for educators or practitiones based on findings of this study as follows: “Educators and practitioners should explicitly include men in media literacy and media education interventions about body image online contents. They should avoid framing body image as a “women’s issue” and use gender-inclusive language. Also, they should promote the discussion of male body image concerns in educational and clinical settings, using male examples and testimonials where appropriate”.

6. Missing Reference: The citation "Scully, Swords, & Nixon, 2023" (Line 41) appears in the text but is missing from the References list.

Reply: as suggested, we inserted it

7. Grammar and Phrasing: Lines 15-16: Change "positively women's one" to "positively affected women's body image preoccupation. Reply: as suggested, we changed it.

• Lines 105-106: Change "man reported" to "men reported."
• Reply: as suggested, we changed it.
• Please proofread the manuscript for similar grammatical inconsistencies.
• Reply: we thank you for this suggestion, we revised the manuscript for grammatical inconsistencies.