Multitrait-Multimethod Investigation of a Novel Body Image Measurement Technique

• Published in: Research quarterly for exercise and sport Vol. 76; no. 4; pp. 407 - 415
• Main Authors: Rowe, David A., McDonald, Suzanne M., Mahar, Matthew T., Raedeke, Thomas D.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Taylor & Francis Group 01-12-2005; Taylor & Francis Ltd
• Subjects: Accuracy; Adolescent; Adult; Body Composition; Body Image; Construct Validity; Digital imaging; Error of Measurement; Evidence; Feeding and Eating Disorders - diagnosis; Female; Females; Humans; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods; instrument development; Measurement techniques; Multitrait Multimethod Techniques; Multivariate Analysis; Personal appearance; Personal Satisfaction; Psychological Studies; Psychosomatic Medicine - methods; Rating Scales; reliability; Reproducibility of Results; Scientific Concepts; Self Concept; Self image; Social Perception; validation; Validity
• ISSN: 0270-1367; 2168-3824
• DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2005.10599313

A multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) matrix was used to evaluate validity evidence for a digital image manipulation (DIM) body image measurement technique in young women. One hundred one young women completed the DIM procedure and the Thompson and Gray (1995) Contour Drawing Rating Scale to measure self-ideal discrepancy and size perception accuracy components of body image. Seven-day test-retest reliability was acceptable (R = .81 − .95). Convergent validity for self-ideal discrepancy was higher (r = .74) than the corresponding heterotrait, monomethod coefficients (r = .46, r = .23) and heterotrait-heteromethod coefficients (r = .18, r = .12). However, the convergent validity coefficient for size perception accuracy was r = .12. The pattern of correlations in the MTMM matrix met the criteria of Campbell and Fiske (1959) for validity of these procedures to measure selfideal discrepancy but not size perception accuracy. The DIM procedure addresses some of the criticisms associated with figurerating scales, such as unrepresentativeness of the figures, scale coarseness, and restriction of range in responses. DIM, therefore, represents a realistic, valid alternative to figure-rating scales for measuring self-ideal discrepancy.