Body Image, Eating Disorder Symptom
Conditions
Brief summary
The second trial of the EVERYbody Project explored the efficacy of the inclusive body image intervention when delivered by college peer leaders. The peer-facilitated EVERYbody Project was compared to a video and expressive writing comparison intervention through one-month follow-up.
Detailed description
The initial trial of the EVERYbody Project established that professional leaders could deliver a universal, inclusive body image program for college students, with benefit above and beyond a waitlist control condition. The second trial of the EVERYbody Project aimed to further evaluate the intervention using a more disseminable facilitator model: trained college student peer leaders. It also utilized a more rigorous comparison condition, where peer leaders conducted the two-session EVERYbody Project program or a time-matched video and expressive writing intervention. College students within a university in the Pacific Northwest United States were invited to participate in programming (universal intervention target). Quantitative assessment included a comparison of changes in eating disorder risk factor outcomes across randomization conditions at pre- and post-intervention and one-month follow-up. Feasibility and acceptability explored the impact of the peer delivered program within universal college student audiences.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALEVERYbody Project
Brief behavioral intervention (4 hours across two meetings)
Brief video-based intervention (4 hours across two meetings)
Sponsors
Western Washington University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
FACTORIAL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
After signing up for a specific time slot, participants were randomized in blocks of 10 to the EVERYbody Project or video comparison condition (two blocks of 10 participant slots were available in each time slot).
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Current college student enrolled at institution where research was taking place
Exclusion criteria
* None
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Eating disorder symptoms | Assessed at baseline (Survey 1), post-intervention (Survey 2), and one-month follow-up (Survey 3) | Eating disorder symptoms were assessed with the Eating Disorders Examination Questionnaire (EDEQ; Fairburn & Beglin, 1994). The Global score of the EDEQ was used in this study (average across all 28 items). |
| Body dissatisfaction | Assessed at baseline (Survey 1), post-intervention (Survey 2), and one-month follow-up (Survey 3) | The Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction with Body Parts Scale (SDBPS; Berscheid, Walster, & Bohrnstedt, 1973) assessed satisfaction and dissatisfaction with nine parts of the body that are commonly endorsed as concerning (e.g., stomach, thighs, hips). The average score was used in this study (average across all 9 items). |
| Internalized cultural appearance norms | Assessed at baseline (Survey 1), following intervention Session 1 (Survey 1.B), post-intervention (Survey 2), and one-month follow-up (Survey 3) | The two Internalization subscales of the Sociocultural Attitudes Toward Appearance Questionnaire-4 (SATAQ-4; Schaefer et al., 2015) assess internalized cultural messages surrounding appearance and attractiveness. The two internalization subscales were combined for this study (average across all 10 items), following prior research by Kilpela et al. (2016). This survey was assessed at all outcome time points (Survey 1, 2, and 3), plus midway through the intervention (following Session 1 of the program). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Negative affect | Assessed at baseline (Survey 1), post-intervention (Survey 2), and one-month follow-up (Survey 3) | Negative affect was assessed with 20 items from the fear, guilt, and sadness subscales of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule-Revised (PANAS-X; Watson & Clark, 1992). The average of all 20 items was used in this study. |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Program satisfaction and application | Assessed at post-intervention (Survey 2) and one-month follow-up (Survey 3). | A series of feedback questions were used to gauge satisfaction with the EVERYbody Project (based on Ciao et al., 2015). These questions included four Likert scale items about enjoyment (e.g., I enjoyed the EVERYbody Project) rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) as well as open-ended questions (e.g., Was any part of the EVERYbody Project particularly helpful/useful? If so, which part and why?) These questions were administered immediately following participation in the EVERYbody Project as a part of the post-intervention survey (Survey 2). At post-intervention (Survey 2) and one-month follow-up (Survey 3), three questions gauged application of information learned in the program (e.g., How often do think about the things you learned in the EVERYbody Project? rated on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (all the time). |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed