Validity of the Social Physique Anxiety Scale

2014 ◽  
Vol 55 ◽  
pp. 573-579
Author(s):  
Mi Ye Kim
Body Image ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen A. Martin Ginis ◽  
Elisa Murru ◽  
Catherine Conlin ◽  
Heather A. Strong

1996 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 963-972 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina M. Frederick ◽  
Craig S. Morrison

Social physique anxiety is a feeling of distress associated with the perceived evaluation of one's physical self. Since its inception, the construct has been associated with a variety of exercise-related constructs including perceived competence, self-consciousness, and the exercise milieu individuals choose. The present purpose was to relate social physique anxiety to participants' attitudes toward exercise, adherence behaviors, participation motivation, personality variables, and emotional attitude toward exercise. 326 university fitness-center participants were surveyed and asked for demographic information, to self-report their exercise habits, and to answer questions measuring the construct, motivation, personality, and attitudes toward exercise. Women had higher scores on the Social Physique Anxiety Scale than men; individuals who scored high were more likely to endorse extrinsic motives for exercise than individuals scoring low on the scale, and high scores were indicative of higher public body awareness. Individuals with high scores on the Social Physique Anxiety Scale exhibited an emotional profile similar to addicted exercisers. Given these results, implications for alleviation of such anxiety were discussed.


1989 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth A. Hart ◽  
Mark R. Leary ◽  
W. Jack Rejeski

A 12-item self-report scale was developed to assess the degree to which people become anxious when others observe or evaluate their physiques. The Social Physique Anxiety Scale (SPAS) demonstrated both high internal and test-retest reliability. It also correlated appropriately with concerns regarding others' evaluations and with feelings about one's body. Validity data showed that women who scored high on the SPAS were heavier and had a higher percentage of body fat than those who scored lower. In addition, high scorers reported significantly greater anxiety during a real evaluation of their physiques, further supporting the validity of the scale. Possible uses of the SPAS in basic research involving physique anxiety and in applied fitness settings are discussed.


2004 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 492-499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magnus Lindwall

This study examined the factorial validity and factorial invariance across gender of the 9-item and two 7-item previously supported unidimensional factor models of the Social Physique Anxiety Scale (SPAS; Hart, Leary, & Rejeski, 1989) in two samples of Swedish male and female university students. Results demonstrated that the Motl and Conroy (2000) 7-item model made the closest ft to data in both the male and female samples. None of the two 7-item models demonstrated invariant factor variances or item uniqueness across gender. Moreover, the factor loadings were not invariant in the Motl and Conroy models. Gender differences in SPAS factor structure, linked to cultural variations in measurement equivalence and future development of gender specific scales, are discussed.


1996 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 420-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trent A. Petrie ◽  
Nancy Diehl ◽  
Rebecca L. Rogers ◽  
Courtney L. Johnson

2002 ◽  
Vol 94 (2) ◽  
pp. 700-702 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vicki R. Walton ◽  
Mel E. Finkenberg

This study involved a comparison of social physique anxiety, assessed through the application of a modified version of the Social Physique Anxiety Scale, with 28 women who were new members exercising at all-female facilities compared to 43 new female members exercising at coeducational facilities. Analyses indicated there were no significant differences in means between the groups. The scores of women attending all-female facilities were significantly more influenced by the sex of members when choosing a facility.


1993 ◽  
Vol 25 (9) ◽  
pp. 1049???1053 ◽  
Author(s):  
EDWARD McAULEY ◽  
GRETCHEN BURMAN

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document