Cited by 467Eating Disorders and BehaviorsBody Image and Dysmorphia StudiesNutrition, Health and Food Behavior

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Social Comparison and Body Image: Attractiveness Comparisons to Models and Peers Among Adolescent Girls and Boys

Jones, Diane Carlson·2001·Sex Roles

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1014815725852

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 47 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 467

Metadata

Authors
Jones, D. C.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Jones, Diane Carlson
Venue
Sex Roles
Published
2001-11
Volume
45
Issue
9-10
Pages
645-664
ISSN
  • 0360-0025 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2762
OpenAlex
W2167191046
Cited by
467
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 25
FWCI
6.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Sex Roles (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Body Image and Dysmorphia Studies
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Keywords
social comparison, body image, body dissatisfaction, attractiveness, media models, celebrity models, same-sex peers, adolescent girls, adolescent boys, gender differences, weight comparison, body shape, facial attractiveness, peer context

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.

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