CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 76Eating Disorders and BehaviorsBody Image and Dysmorphia StudiesGender, Feminism, and Media

Add a comment … how fitspiration and body positive captions attached to social media images influence the mood and body esteem of young female Instagram users

Davies, Bryony, Turner, Mark, Udell, Julie·2020·Body Image
DOI 10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.02.009
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Social media content can negatively influence body esteem in young women by reinforcing beliefs that to be considered attractive, people must look a certain way. The current study examines how text associated with attractive social media images impacts on female users' mood and feelings about their own body. Female participants (N = 109) aged between 18 and 25 years were randomly allocated to one of three conditions in which they viewed the same fitspiration-style images from Instagram. However, the captions associated with each image were experimentally manipulated to reflect either a fitspiration, body positive, or neutral theme. Images associated with fitspiration captions encouraging observers to improve their personal fitness led to increased negative mood. When body-positive captions encouraging the self-acceptance of appearance or highlighting the unrealistic nature of social media content were viewed with the same images, no increase in negative affect was observed, and participants reported greater body esteem post exposure. The findings provide partial support for the idea that body positive comments accompanying images on Instagram may have some protective value for female body esteem. Captions may play an important part in observers' reactions to social media images, beyond the influence of the images alone.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In an experiment with 109 young women aged 18–25, identical fitspiration-style Instagram images were paired with fitspiration, body-positive, or neutral captions. Fitspiration captions increased negative mood, while body-positive captions did not improve mood but were associated with higher weight-related and overall body esteem than fitspiration or neutral captions.

Key findings

  • Fitspiration captions significantly increased negative mood from pre- to post-exposure, \(F(1,106)=5.95, p=.016, \eta_p^2=.053\), with no significant reduction in positive mood, \(F(1,106)=0.15, p=.698\).
  • Body-positive captions produced no significant change in positive mood, \(F(1,106)=3.58, p=.061\), or negative mood, \(F(1,106)=0.31, p=.580\), rejecting the mood-improvement hypothesis.
  • Body-positive captions were associated with significantly higher weight esteem and overall body esteem than fitspiration captions: weight esteem \(t(106)=2.78, p=.007, d=0.54\); overall body esteem \(t(106)=2.06, p=.042, d=0.40\). They were also higher than neutral captions: weight esteem \(t(106)=2.76, p=.007, d=0.53\); overall body esteem \(t(106)=2.52, p=.007, d=0.49\).
  • Fitspiration and neutral captions did not differ on weight esteem, \(t(106)=-0.11, p=.911, d=0.02\), or overall body esteem, \(t(106)=0.38, p=.705, d=0.08\). Caption type had no effect on sexual attractiveness or physical conditioning esteem.

Methods

  • Experimental design: 154 young adult women active on Instagram were recruited; after screening for incomplete responses or viewing images less than three seconds, 109 women aged 18–25 (\(M=21.58\), \(SD=1.54\)) were randomly allocated to fitspiration, body-positive, or neutral caption conditions.
  • Stimuli: 19 fitspiration-style Instagram images were held constant across conditions; only the captions were experimentally manipulated. Body-positive captions included 68% acceptance/healthy body-size messages and 32% self-admissions of images’ contrived nature.
  • Measures and analysis: pre/post mood was assessed with the International-Positive and Negative Affect Scale–Short Form; post-exposure body esteem was assessed with the Body Esteem Scale. Mood was analyzed with 3 × 2 mixed ANOVAs and planned orthogonal comparisons; body esteem subscales were analyzed with one-way ANOVAs and planned comparisons.

Limitations

  • The paper states there was no identical baseline measure of body esteem, so it cannot be empirically determined whether body-positive captions caused increases in body esteem; baseline health satisfaction was used as a proxy and accounted for only 37% of variance in post-exposure body esteem.
  • The paper states the stimuli included food images (21%) alongside posed and active images, and it is unknown how food images may have impacted participants or interacted with caption content.
  • The paper states body-positive captions mixed acceptance messages and contrived-nature messages, so the specific effective elements cannot be identified; it also notes small-to-medium effect sizes and possible Type II error, suggesting larger samples may be needed. Evident from the text: the sample was restricted to women aged 18–25, and the images were drawn from public profiles of young white women, limiting generalizability.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.02.009

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

24 tests recomputed · 0 with the reported and recomputed p on opposite sides of .05

Claims the paper makes

0 of 35 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data
    § 3.1. The Influence of Social Media Comment Types on Mood

    Negative mood increased from pre- to post-exposure across conditions.

    “However, a significant main effect of time occurred, F (1,106) = 6.81, p = .01, η 2 p = .060, indicating that negative mood increased from pre- to post-exposure.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § 3.1. The Influence of Social Media Comment Types on Mood

    In the fitspiration condition, there was a significant increase in negative mood after viewing images.

    “but a significant increase in negative mood, F (1,106) = 5.95, p = .016, η 2 p = .053, after viewing images, partially supporting the hypothesis (Table 1).”
    • Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
      “Images associated with fitspiration captions encouraging observers to improve their personal fitness led to increased negative mood.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § 3.1. The Influence of Social Media Comment Types on Mood

    In the fitspiration condition, there was no reduction in positive mood after viewing images.

    “This indicated no reduction in positive mood, F (1,106) = 0.15, p = .698, η 2 p = .001”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § 2.3.3. Satisfaction with diet, exercise, and health.

    The baseline health satisfaction measure correlated strongly with overall body esteem post-exposure, r(107)=.61, p<.001.

    “This baseline measure correlated strongly with overall body esteem post-exposure, r (107) = .61, p < .001.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § 3.2 The Influence of Social Media Comment Types on Body Esteem

    There were significant differences between the three caption conditions in weight concern and overall body esteem post-exposure.

    “These showed significant differences in weight concern, F (2,106) = 5.10, p = .008, η 2 = .09, and overall body esteem, F (2,106) = 3.59, p = .031, η 2 = .06, but not sexual attractiveness or physical condition, between the three caption conditions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 24
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 30
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 3.2 The Influence of Social Media Comment Types on Body Esteem

    Weight esteem and overall body esteem did not differ between the fitspiration and neutral caption conditions.

    “The third planned comparison showed weight esteem, t (106) = -0.11, p = .911, d = 0.02, and overall body-esteem, t (106) = 0.38, p = .705, d = 0.08, did not differ between the fitspiration and neutral caption conditions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 3.2 The Influence of Social Media Comment Types on Body Esteem

    Weight esteem and overall body esteem were significantly higher in the body positive condition than the neutral caption condition.

    “The second planned comparison showed weight esteem, t (106) = 2.76, p = .007, d = 0.53, and overall body-esteem, t (106) = 2.52, p = .007, d = 0.49, were also significantly higher in the body positive condition than neutral caption condition, supporting the hypothesis.”
    • Also stated in: § 4. Discussion · plain
      “but they were associated with greater post-exposure body esteem compared to neutral or fitspiration captions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 3.1. The Influence of Social Media Comment Types on Mood

    For negative mood, there was no interaction between time and condition, and no significant main effect of condition.

    “For negative mood, there was no interaction between time and condition, F (2,106) = 0.93, p = .398, η 2 p = .017, and no significant main effect of condition, F (2,106) = 1.85, p = .162, η 2 p = .034.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 3.1. The Influence of Social Media Comment Types on Mood

    For positive mood, there was no significant interaction between time and caption condition, and no significant main effects of time or caption condition.

    “For positive mood, no significant interaction, F (1,106) = 1.27, p = .283, η 2 p =.024, and no significant main effects of time, F (1,106) = 1.76, p = .188, η 2 p = .016, or caption condition, F (1,106) = 0.25, p = .779, η 2 p =.005, were found.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 3.2 The Influence of Social Media Comment Types on Body Esteem

    Weight esteem and overall body esteem were significantly higher in the body positive condition than the fitspiration condition.

    “the first planned comparison showed weight esteem, t (106) = 2.78, p = .007, d = 0.54, and overall body-esteem, t (106) = 2.06, p = .042, d = 0.40, were significantly higher in the body positive condition than the fitspiration condition.”
    • Also stated in: § 4. Discussion · plain
      “but they were associated with greater post-exposure body esteem compared to neutral or fitspiration captions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4. Discussion

    Health satisfaction correlated well with body esteem but accounted for only 37% of the variance in post-exposure body esteem scores.

    “whilst health satisfaction correlated well with body esteem, it accounted for only 37% of the variance in post-exposure scores in our study.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction

    Fitspiration posts are common on social media.

    “'Fitspiration' posts which combine images and messages emphasizing the appeal of exercise and diet to improve physical health, attractiveness, and lifestyle are common on social media (Deighton-Smith & Bell, 2018; Griffiths & Stefanovski, 2019).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Deighton-Smith & Bell, 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Griffiths & Stefanovski, 2019

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction

    Users' comments posted as responses to social media images influence the impressions formed of profile owners.

    “Users' comments posted as responses to social media images have been demonstrated to influence the impressions formed of profile owners (Walther, Van Der Heide, Hamel, & Shulman, 2009)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Walther, Van Der Heide, Hamel, & Shulman, 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction

    Viewing a mock Instagram account containing a mix of fitspiration images and images of self-compassion quotes overlaid on patterned backgrounds improved body satisfaction outcomes compared to viewing fitspiration images alone.

    “Slater, Varsani, and Diedrichs (2017) demonstrated that viewing a mock Instagram account containing a mix of fitspiration images and images of self-compassion quotes overlaid on patterned backgrounds, improved body satisfaction outcomes compared to viewing fitspiration images alone.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Slater, Varsani, and Diedrichs (2017)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction

    Exposure to Instagram posts consisting of body positive images and captions can lead to improved outcomes for young adult women compared to thin-ideal or landscape-focused posts.

    “Cohen, Fardouly, Newton-John, and Slater (2019) have shown exposure to Instagram posts consisting of body positive images and captions can lead to improved outcomes for young adult women compared to thin-ideal or landscape-focused posts.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cohen, Fardouly, Newton-John, and Slater (2019)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 2.2. Design

    Each Instagram post and peripheral detail were identical across conditions, with the exception of the profile owners' comments used to caption each image.

    “Each Instagram post and peripheral detail (e.g., 'likes' received) were identical across conditions”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction

    Comments praising physical appearance led to greater body dissatisfaction in observers than comments referring to the background or location of images.

    “Tiggemann and Barbato (2018) found that comments praising physical appearance led to greater body dissatisfaction in observers than comments referring to the background or location of the images.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Tiggemann and Barbato (2018)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § 1. Introduction

    Fitspiration trends may exert additional pressures on how women should look that go beyond simple weight concern, requiring a multifaceted approach for assessing body-esteem outcomes.

    “It follows that fitspiration trends may exert additional pressures on how women should look that go beyond simple weight concern, and which require a multifaceted approach for assessing body-esteem outcomes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation
    § 2.3.1. State mood

    Pre- and post-exposure mood was assessed using the International-Positive and Negative Affect ScaleShort Form.

    “Pre- and post-exposure mood was assessed using the International-Positive and Negative Affect ScaleShort Form (Thompson, 2007)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Thompson, 2007 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation
    § 2.1. Sample

    A priori power analysis indicated that a minimum of 33 participants were required per condition.

    “A priori power analysis using effect size estimates from recent social media studies (Saiphoo & Vahedi, 2019) indicated that a minimum of 33 participants were required per condition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Saiphoo & Vahedi, 2019 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction

    Fitspiration images are more likely to adhere to thin and athletic ideals and also contain sexualized images that objectify female body parts.

    “a content analysis by Carrotte, Prichard, and Lim (2017) revealed fitspiration images are not only more likely to adhere to thin and athletic ideals, but also contain sexualized images that objectify female body parts.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Carrotte, Prichard, and Lim (2017)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 2.1. Sample

    Participants were randomly allocated to one of three conditions.

    “Participants were randomly allocated to one of three conditions in which they viewed images from real Instagram posts, drawn from public profiles of young white women.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction

    Comments emphasizing the selective and edited nature of Instagram images were ineffective at reducing body dissatisfaction and led to less favorable impressions of the profile owner.

    “Comments presented below Instagram images of highly attractive women, emphasizing their selective and edited nature, were found to be ineffective at reducing body dissatisfaction in observers and led to less favorable impressions of the profile owner (Fardouly & Holland, 2018).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Fardouly & Holland, 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 2.2. Design

    The image presentation order was randomized across participants.

    “The image presentation order was randomized across participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 2.2. Design

    To ensure images were attended to, participants were timed and informed that they would be given a short memory test at the end of the study.

    “To ensure images were attended to, participants were timed and informed that they would be given a short memory test at the end of the study.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction

    Exposure to fitspiration content does not necessarily lead observers to engage in greater exercise.

    “without necessarily leading observers to engage in greater exercise (Robinson et al., 2017).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Robinson et al., 2017 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data
    § 2.1. Sample

    Participants with incomplete responses or those taking less than three seconds to view each image were screened out, leaving 109 women aged 18-25 years.

    “Participants with incomplete responses or those taking less than three seconds to view each image were screened out, leaving 109 women aged 18-25 years ( M = 21.58; SD = 1.54).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data
    § 2.3.1. State mood

    The I-PANAS-SF had averaged Cronbach's alpha values of .78 for positive mood and .85 for negative mood.

    “Averaged Cronbach's alpha values were .78 for positive mood and .85 for negative mood.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 4. Discussion

    Engagement with body-positivity may help reduce damaging social comparisons and encourage flexibility in acceptance of different body types so that observers are less likely to critique their own appearance through social media comparisons with other women.

    “It has been suggested that engagement with body-positivity may help reduce damaging social comparisons and encourage flexibility in the acceptance of different body types so that observers are less likely to critique their own appearance through social media comparisons with other women (Kelly, Vimalakanthan, & Miller, 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kelly, Vimalakanthan, & Miller, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § 2.3.2. Body esteem

    The BES was selected to provide a more nuanced measure of body esteem compared to simple VAS, with subscales reflecting key themes associated with fitspiration content.

    “The BES was selected to provide a more nuanced measure of body esteem compared to simple visual analogue scales (VAS), with subscales that reflected the key themes associated with fitspiration content (Carrotte et al., 2017).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Carrotte et al., 2017 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 2.3.2. Body esteem

    The BES is typically considered a trait measure but correlates well with situational measures of body image.

    “Whilst the BES is typically considered as a trait measure, it correlates well with situational measures of body image (Thomas & Freeman, 1990).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Thomas & Freeman, 1990

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation
    § 2.3.2. Body esteem

    The Body Esteem Scale was used post-exposure to evaluate how individuals felt about 35 different parts or attributes of their own body.

    “The Body Esteem Scale (BES; Franzoi & Shields, 1984) was used post-exposure to evaluate how individuals felt about 35 different parts or attributes of their own body”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Franzoi & Shields, 1984

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data
    § 2.3.2. Body esteem

    The BES had observed Cronbach's alpha values of .83 (Sexual Attractiveness), .90 (Weight Concern), and .87 (Physical Conditioning).

    “Observed Cronbach's alpha values were .83 (Sexual Attractiveness), .90 (Weight Concern), and .87 (Physical Conditioning).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § 4. Discussion

    The small to medium effect sizes observed in this study are consistent with those reported previously for conventional media, but underrepresent those found in more recent appearance-focused studies of social media.

    “The small to medium effect sizes observed in this study are consistent with those reported previously for conventional media, but they underrepresent those found in more recent appearance-focused studies of social media (Saiphoo & Vahedi, 2019).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Saiphoo & Vahedi, 2019 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § 2.3.2. Body esteem

    Measures assessing satisfaction with individual body parts show similar temporal instability to state body dissatisfaction ratings.

    “Measures assessing satisfaction with individual body parts are also known to show similar temporal instability to state body dissatisfaction ratings (Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Richardson, Lewis, Smyth, & Krug, 2018).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Richardson, Lewis, Smyth, & Krug, 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data
    § 2.2. Design

    The mean thinness rating of women in selected images was 7.98 (10 being thinnest).

    “The mean thinness rating of women in the selected images was 7.98 (10 being the thinnest).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 4. Discussion

    How the food images used may have impacted participants relative to other images, or interacted with caption content, is not known.

    “Whilst the food images we used were constant across all conditions, how these may have impacted on participants relative to other images, or have interacted with caption content, is not known.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 4. Discussion

    The public presentation of food, nutrition, and eating habits has become a ritual component of social media, although the values attached to such content in young people is not well understood.

    “The public presentation of food, nutrition, and eating habits has become a ritual component of social media, although the values attached to such content in young people is not well understood (Goodyear, Armour, & Wood, 2019).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Goodyear, Armour, & Wood, 2019

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4. Discussion

    It is possible that such an effect may have restricted the observed impact on mood and body esteem of the body positive condition in the present study.

    “It is possible that such an effect may have restricted the observed impact on mood and body esteem of the body positive condition in the present study.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § 4. Discussion

    In conclusion, the current study provides partial support for the idea that body positive captions accompanying images on Instagram may function in a similar way to self-compassion quotes and have some protective value for observers.

    “In conclusion, the current study provides partial support for the idea that body positive captions accompanying images on Instagram may function in a similar way to self-compassion quotes and have some protective value for observers.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § 4. Discussion

    However, their impact may be limited in scope with respect to specific aspects of body esteem and require concordance between the image and caption theme to be seen as authentic by observers.

    “However, their impact may be limited in scope with respect to specific aspects of body esteem and require concordance between the image and caption theme to be seen as authentic by observers.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data
    § 4. Discussion

    No baseline differences in health satisfaction measure or participant mood were found between the three caption conditions.

    “No baseline differences in this health satisfaction measure, or participant mood, were found between the three caption conditions”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 4. Discussion

    Body positive comments do not prevent observers from being exposed to idealized images, so their ability to affect body esteem is restricted.

    “Since body positive comments do not prevent observers from being exposed to idealized images, their ability to effect body esteem is restricted (Paraskeva, Lewis-Smith, & Diedrichs, 2017).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Paraskeva, Lewis-Smith, & Diedrichs, 2017

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4. Discussion

    The BES scale was administered once, post exposure, to avoid pretesting effects.

    “To avoid pretesting effects with BES items, the scale was administered once, post exposure.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4. Discussion

    A further limitation of the study may be the specific stimuli selected, which included posed and active images of people and food.

    “A further limitation of our study may be the specific stimuli selected, which not only included posed and active images of people, but also food.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation
    § 4. Discussion

    The scale and approach were chosen given known measurement issues with VAS scales used in similar research and to avoid difficulties where identical ratings are completed at short intervals.

    “We chose this scale and approach given known measurement issues with VAS scales used in similar research (Torrance, Feeny, & Furlong, 2001) and to avoid difficulties where identical ratings are completed at short intervals.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Torrance, Feeny, & Furlong, 2001

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4. Discussion

    A consequence of using a mixture of body positive captions is that the results do not indicate which specific elements of body positive captions were responsible for the observed effects.

    “However, a consequence of this decision is that our results do not indicate which specific elements of body positive captions were responsible for the observed effects.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data
    § 2.2. Design

    The average time spent considering each image was 11.25 s (95%CI [10.02, 12.47]).

    “The average time spent considering each image was 11.25 s ( 95%CI [10.02, 12.47]).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § 4. Discussion

    The finding that no advantage of body positive over fitspiration captions was found for sexual attractiveness or physical conditioning esteem is consistent with the view that fitspiration posts may have both motivational as well as negative effects.

    “consistent with the view that fitspiration posts may have both motivational as well as negative effects (Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation
    § 4. Discussion

    A strength of the approach is that it reflects the composition of real Instagram accounts promoting body positivity, which typically integrate both message types.

    “A strength of this approach is that it reflects the composition of real Instagram accounts promoting body body positivity which typically integrate both message types (Cohen, Irwin, Newton-John, & Slater, 2019).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cohen, Irwin, Newton-John, & Slater, 2019

      Not checked in the free run.

45 of 45

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Little is known about the direct impact of image captions on social media users.

    “However, little is known about the direct impact of these image captions, and more research is needed to understand their specific effects on social media users.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The precise role played by words either overlaying or accompanying social media images remains unclear.

    “The precise role played by words either overlaying or accompanying social media images remains unclear”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is yet to be a social media study of body esteem that has considered the impact of both message types together.

    “To our knowledge, there is yet to be a social media study of body esteem that has considered the impact of both message types together.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is a greater discrepancy between one's natural appearance and how women portray themselves on social media than between one's appearance and those they interact with face-to-face on a daily basis.

    “since there is a greater discrepancy between one's natural appearance and how women portray themselves on social media, than there is between one's appearance and those they interact with face-to-face on daily basis.”
4 of 4

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Some experimental studies with young women have found that exposure to body-positive images and captions can improve mood, body satisfaction, and body appreciation relative to viewing thin-ideal images or 'fitspiration' captions.

    “Some experimental studies with young women have found that exposure to body-positive images and captions can improve mood, body satisfaction, and body appreciation relative to viewing thin-ideal images or 'fitspiration' captions (Cohen et al., 2019; Davies et al., 2020; Williamson &amp; Karazsia, 2018).”

    From The Perfect Storm: A Developmental-Sociocultural Framework for the Role of Social Media in Adolescent Girls' Body Image Concerns and Mental Health. (2022) · cites this paper as Davies et al., 2020

    The Results (§3.2; page not provided) report higher overall and weight-related body esteem with body-positive than with fitspiration captions. The Discussion (§4; page not provided) says body-positive captions prevented an increase in negative mood, but did not improve mood. Davies et al. tested different captions on identical fitspiration-style images, not body-positive versus thin-ideal images, and did not report a body-appreciation measure. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Statistics that don’t add up

Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.

  • p-value fits an unstated one-tailed test: t (106) = 2.52, p = .007

    Minor

    The paper reports p = .007 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .013 (two-tailed). The reported value is what a one-tailed test gives, but the paper does not say near this result that a one-tailed test was used.

    Reported p = .007 · recomputed p = .013

  • Inconsistent p-value: F (1,106) = 1.27, p = .283

    Minor

    The paper reports p = .283 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .262. The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.

    Reported p = .283 · recomputed p = .262

  • Inconsistent p-value: F (1,106) = 0.25, p = .779

    Minor

    The paper reports p = .779 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .618. The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.

    Reported p = .779 · recomputed p = .618

3 of 3

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • Doesn’t add upF(1, 106) = 1.27reported p = .283 · recomputed p = .262

    “F (1,106) = 1.27, p = .283”

  • Doesn’t add upF(1, 106) = 0.25reported p = .779 · recomputed p = .618

    “F (1,106) = 0.25, p = .779”

  • Doesn’t add upt(106) = 2.52reported p = .007 · recomputed p = .013

    “t (106) = 2.52, p = .007”

  • Consistentr(107) = 0.61reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “r (107) = .61, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(2, 106) = 1.27reported p = .285 · recomputed p = .285

    “F (2,106) = 1.27, p = .285”

  • ConsistentF(2, 106) = 0.87reported p = .423 · recomputed p = .422

    “F (2,106) = 0.87, p = .423”

  • ConsistentF(2, 106) = 0.97reported p = .384 · recomputed p = .382

    “F (2,106) = 0.97, p = .384”

  • ConsistentF(1, 106) = 1.76reported p = .188 · recomputed p = .187

    “F (1,106) = 1.76, p = .188”

  • ConsistentF(2, 106) = 0.93reported p = .398 · recomputed p = .398

    “F (2,106) = 0.93, p = .398”

  • ConsistentF(2, 106) = 1.85reported p = .162 · recomputed p = .162

    “F (2,106) = 1.85, p = .162”

  • ConsistentF(1, 106) = 6.81reported p = .01 · recomputed p = .010

    “F (1,106) = 6.81, p = .01”

  • ConsistentF(1, 106) = 0.15reported p = .698 · recomputed p = .699

    “F (1,106) = 0.15, p = .698”

  • ConsistentF(1, 106) = 5.95reported p = .016 · recomputed p = .016

    “F (1,106) = 5.95, p = .016”

  • ConsistentF(1, 106) = 3.58reported p = .061 · recomputed p = .061

    “F (1,106) = 3.58, p = .061”

  • ConsistentF(1, 106) = 0.31reported p = .58 · recomputed p = .579

    “F (1,106) = 0.31, p = .580”

  • ConsistentF(1, 106) = 0.69reported p = .408 · recomputed p = .408

    “F (1,106) = 0.69, p = .408”

  • ConsistentF(1, 106) = 2.26reported p = .136 · recomputed p = .136

    “F (1,106) = 2.26, p = .136”

  • ConsistentF(2, 106) = 5.1reported p = .008 · recomputed p = .008

    “F (2,106) = 5.10, p = .008”

  • ConsistentF(2, 106) = 3.59reported p = .031 · recomputed p = .031

    “F (2,106) = 3.59, p = .031”

  • Consistentt(106) = 2.78reported p = .007 · recomputed p = .006

    “t (106) = 2.78, p = .007”

  • Consistentt(106) = 2.06reported p = .042 · recomputed p = .042

    “t (106) = 2.06, p = .042”

  • Consistentt(106) = 2.76reported p = .007 · recomputed p = .007

    “t (106) = 2.76, p = .007”

  • Consistentt(106) = -0.11reported p = .911 · recomputed p = .913

    “t (106) = -0.11, p = .911”

  • Consistentt(106) = 0.38reported p = .705 · recomputed p = .705

    “t (106) = 0.38, p = .705”

24 of 24

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Self-check results appear here once an independent check has confirmed them.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Davies, B., Turner, M., & Udell, J.
Affiliations
University of Portsmouth (GB)
Corresponding author
Davies, Bryony
ORCID
Venue
Body Image
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-06
Volume
33
Pages
101-105
ISSN
1740-1445 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.02.009
OpenAlex
W3012518036
Cited by
76
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 1
FWCI
4.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Body Image (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Body Image and Dysmorphia Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Feminism, and Media
Keywords
fitspiration, Instagram, body esteem, mood, young women, self-acceptance, negative affect
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Affect, Association, Body Image, Emotions, Female, Humans, Reinforcement, Verbal, Young Adult, Social Media

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review