ArticleScientific reports2020
Perceived match between own and observed models' bodies: influence of face, viewpoints, and body size.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anorexia Nervosa, Body Image Perception and Virtual Reality Therapeutic Applications: State of the Art and Operational Proposal.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Accurate prediction of three-dimensional humanoid avatars for anthropometric modeling.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2024Article
- Accurate Prediction of Three-Dimensional Humanoid Avatars for Anthropometric Modeling.Research square · 2024Article
- Effects of pitch and musical sounds on body-representations when moving with sound.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Use of a real-life practical context changes the relationship between implicit body representations and real body measurements.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- The Perceived Match Between Observed and Own Bodies, but Not Its Accuracy, Is Influenced by Movement Dynamics and Clothing Cues.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People are generally unable to accurately determine their own body measurements and to translate this knowledge to identifying a model/avatar that best represents their own body. This inability has not only been related to health problems (e.g. anorexia nervosa), but has important practical implications as well (e.g. online retail). Here we aimed to investigate the influence of three basic visual features-face presence, amount of viewpoints, and observed model size-on the perceived match between own and observed models' bodies and on attitudes towards these models. Models were real-life models (Experiment 1) or avatar models based on participants' own bodies (Experiment 2). Results in both experiments showed a strong effect of model size, irrespective of participants' own body measurements. When models were randomly presented one by one, participants gave significantly higher ratings to smaller- compared to bigger-sized models. The reverse was true, however, when participants observed and compared models freely, suggesting that the mode of presentation affected participants' judgments. Limited evidence was found for an effect of facial presence or amount of viewpoints. These results add evidence to research on visual features affecting the ability to match observed bodies with own body image, which has biological, clinical, and practical implications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.