Disordered Eating and Psychopathology
|
Boisvert et al. (2013) (Canada) [38]
|
EDI- 1 item from each of DT, B, BD
|
Religiosity- ‘I would describe myself as religious’ (King et al., 2001)
|
8 IV
|
Correlation- Spirituality and eating disorder symptomatology (r = −.19, p < .001).
|
Spirituality- SWBS- 2 items from EWB subscale
|
ANCOVA- Spirituality and eating disorder symptomatology (F(1, 497) = 13.74, p < .001).
|
Boisvert et al. (2012) (Canada) [37]
|
EDI- 1 item from each of DT, B, BD
|
Religiosity- ‘I would describe myself as religious’. (King et al., 2001)
|
8 IV
|
Correlation- Eating disorder symptomatology not significantly related to spirituality (r = −.07) or religion (r = .08).
|
Spirituality- SWBS- 2 items from EWB subscale
|
Path analysis- 10 % of the variance in EDI was explained by BMI (b = .28, p < .001) and body shame (b = .15, p < .001). 6 % of the variance in body shame was explained by age (older men had higher EDI) (b = .15, p < .001), being Asian (b = .11, p < .01) and lower spirituality (b = −.15, p < .001). Spirituality had a sig indirect effect on EDI mediated by body shame (b = −.02).
|
Boyatzis et al. (2006) (USA) [35]
|
EDI – DT, B
|
Quest Scale
|
10 IV
|
Correlation- College freshmen + sophomores- Bulimia: Total Quest (r = .33, p < .01), Existential Questioning (r = .29, p < .05), Doubting as positive (r = .23, p < .10).
|
College juniors + seniors- Openness to Change: Bulimia (r = .28, p < .10), Drive for Thinness (r = .27, p < .10).
|
Buser (2013) (USA) [47]
|
BULIT-R
|
5 RCOPE subscales
|
13 IV
|
Correlation- Punishing God/Higher power reappraisal andbulimic symptoms (r = .25, p < .001). Other subscales not sig.
|
Punishing God/Higher power reappraisal, passive religious deferral, active religious surrender, benevolent religious reappraisal/spiritual support and religious focus.
|
Hierarchical Regression- 1st step: BMI + religious affiliation 7.9 % (F(2, 589) = 25.23. p < .001), 2nd step: 5 coping scales 5.5 % (F(5, 584) = 7.469, p < .001) Cohen’s f2 = .06. Punishing God/Higher power reappraisal- (β = .242, p < .001).
|
Mediation Analysis- Punishing God/Higher power reappraisal partially mediated relationship between stress and bulimic symptoms. Sobel Test (z = 2.975, p < .01).
|
Feinson et al. (2012) (Israel) [41]
|
DEB-SQ
|
Self-reported religious observance category
|
9 IV
|
ANOVA- No Sig Differences.
|
Forthun et al. (2003) (USA) [29]
|
FAD- GFF subscale
|
I/E-R
|
9 IV
|
Correlation- Intrinsic religiousness: Bulimia (r = −.13, p < .01), Drive for Thinness (r = −.07, p < .05).
|
FARS- items selected
|
Hierarchical regression + Simple Slope Analyses
|
EDI – DT, B
|
Family dysfunction- B: Family x Intrinsic (B = −0.53, p < .01), Family x Extrinsic (B = 0.45, p < .10).
|
DT: Family x Extrinsic (B = 0.69, p < .10).
|
Intrinsic buffered association between family and B. Extrinsic made people more vulnerable to B/DT.
|
Parental History- B: History x Extrinsic (B = 2.29, p < .01).
|
DT: History x Intrinsic (B = −2.45, p < .05), History x Extrinsic (B = 2.98, p < .05).
|
Intrinsic buffered association between history and DT. Extrinsic made people more vulnerable to B/DT.
|
Gates et al. (2009) (USA) [36]
|
EDI- B, DT
|
MQOS- Religious angst subscale
|
8 IV
|
ANOVA- Religious Angst: Higher levels of Drive for Thinness (F =1.86, p < 0.01), Bulimia (F =1.89, p < 0.01).
|
Gluck et al. (2002) (USA) [39]
|
EDE-Q
|
Orthodox Traditions Scale
|
9 IV
|
ANOVA- secular Jews had higher EDE-Q scores then Orthodox Jews (F[1,125] = 8.5; P = .004).
|
RIQ
|
Chi-square- Secular women were more likely to use laxatives to control their shape and weight (χ
2 [1,123] = 5.8, p = .02).
|
|
MLR- SES + religious grouping: 11 % total EDE-Q (R2 = .11, p = .001).
|
Jacobs-Pilipski et al. (2005) (USA) [33]
|
EDE
|
13-item self-report measure of spiritual and religious beliefs and practices.
|
9 IV
|
ANOVA- No significant relationships.
|
EDI-2- DT, B
|
Latzer et al. (2014) (USA) [43]
|
EDI
|
Brief R-COPE
|
9 IV
|
Correlation- Negative religious coping: total EDI (r = .28, p < .01), Drive for Thinness (r = .23 p < .05), Ineffectiveness (r = .24, p < .05), Maturity (r = .25, p < .05), EAT bulimia (r = .22, p < .05).
|
EAT-26
|
Regression- Negative religious coping (control BMI): total EDI (R2 = .19, p < .01), Ineffectiveness (R2 = .07, p < .05), Maturity (R2 = .06, p < .05), EAT Bulimia (R2 = .07, p < .05).
|
Latzer et al. (2007) (Israel) [40]
|
EDI-2
|
Level of Religiosity Questionnaire
|
10 IV
|
ANOVA- Religious observance: (low > Intermediate = high) total EDI (p < 0.008), Interpersonal Distrust (p < 0.03), Interceptive Awareness (p < 0.003), Asceticism (p < 0.01), Impulse Regulation (p < 0.02) and Social Insecurity (p < 0.03)
|
Correlation- Religiosity Level: EDI-2 total (r = −0.15 p < 0.01), Body dissatisfaction (r = −0.14 p < 0.01), Ineffectiveness (r = −0.14 p < 0.01), Interpersonal distrust (r = −0.11 p < 0.01), Impulse regulation (r = −0.17 p < 0.01), Social insecurity (r = −0.16 p < 0.01)
|
Regression- Religiosity and total EDI (p = .043)
|
Mahoney et al. (2005) (USA) [31]
|
Dieting Practices Inventory- Unhealthy Dieting Practices subscale
|
Manifestation of God in the Body scale.
|
9 IV
|
Partial Correlation (BMI + gender controlled): Unhealthy dieting practises: Manifestation of God (r = −.12,p < .05), Sacred Qualities (r = −.18, p < .001) and Global Religiousness (r = −.13, p < .05). Binge eating: Sacred Qualities (r = −.14, p < .01).
|
Binge Eating Scale
|
Sacred Qualities of the Body scale.
|
|
Global Religiousness Score
|
Pinhas et al. (2008) (Canada) [42]
|
EAT 26
|
Self Reported level of observance
|
9 IV
|
No sig differences.
|
Watkins et al. (2006) (USA) [32]
|
QEWP-R
|
SWBS- RWB + EWB
|
11 IV
|
ANOVA- SWBS: None binge- 96.35, Objective binge- 91.78, Binge trait- 86.11 (p ≤ 0.000) (BT < NB, BT < OB) RWB: None binge- 46.34, Objective binge- 43.63, Binge trait- 40.93 (p ≤ 0.000) (BT < NB) EWB: None binge- 50.09, Objective binge- 48.15, Binge trait- 45.18 (p ≤ 0.000) (BT < NB, BT < OB).
|
Weinberger-Litman et al. (2008) (USA) [44]
|
EAT-26
|
Self-reported level of religious observance
|
10 IV
|
ANOVA- Religious orientation: EAT total (F = 5.48, p = .001), Dieting (F = 3.78, p = .01), Bulimia (F = 4.49, p = .004), Oral Control (F = 4.45, p = .004). Generally lowest symptom severity to highest: Intrinsic, Anti-Religious, Pro-Religious and Extrinsic.
|
ROS
|
ANCOVA (control age, BMI, religious observance, anxiety and depression)- all remain sig except oral control.
|
SWB
| |
Body Image Concerns
|
Boisvert et al. (2013) (Canada) [38]
|
OBC- 2 items from Body Shame subscale
|
Religiosity- ‘I would describe myself as religious’ (King et al., 2001)
|
8 IV
|
Correlation- Spirituality and Body Shame (r = −.21, p < .01).
|
Spirituality- SWB- 2 items from EWB subscale
|
ANCOVA- Spirituality and Body Shame (F(1, 502) = 21.36, p < .001).
|
Boisvert et al. (2012) (Canada) [37]
|
OBC- 2 items from Body Shame subscale
|
Religiosity- ‘I would describe myself as religious’. (King et al., 2001)
|
8 IV
|
Correlation- Spirituality and Body shame (r = −.16, p < .01).
|
Spirituality- SWB- 2 items from EWB subscale
|
Path analysis- 10 % of the variance in EDI was explained by BMI (b = .28, p < .001) and Body Shame (b = .15, p < .001). 6 % of the variance in Body Shame was explained by age (older men had higher EDI) (b = .15, p < .001), being Asian (b = .11, p < .01) and lower spirituality (b = −.15, p < .001). Spirituality had a sig indirect effect on EDI mediated by Body Shame (b = −.02).
|
Boyatzis et al. (2007) (USA) [25]
|
BE Scale
|
Demographic Survey- Self reported importance of religion
|
10 IIb
|
ANOVA- BE-Appearance: (F(2, 122) = 5.42, p = 0.006). Religious group (M = 1.26) increased more than Control group (M = −0.98) (p = 0.005).
|
BE- Appearance and BE- weight subscales
|
BE- Weight: no sig differences.
|
ANCOVA- BMI and pre-test scores as covariates. BE- Appearance: F(2,114) = 4.20, p < 0.02 (pre-test scores), F(2, 114) = 5.53, p < 0.01 (BMI).
|
BE- weight: no sig differences.
|
Boyatzis et al. (2006) (USA) [35]
|
EDI – BD
|
Quest Scale
|
10 IV
|
Correlation-College freshmen + sophomores- Body Dissatisfaction: Total Quest scores (r = .34, p < .01.), Existential Questioning (r = .31, p < .05), Doubting as Positive (r = .28, p < .05).
|
BE scale
|
College juniors + seniors- Body Esteem and Openness to Change (r = −.31, p < .05)
|
|
College graduates- Body dissatisfaction and Existential Questioning (r = −.25, p < .10).
|
Gates et al. (2009) (USA) [36]
|
EDI- BD
|
MQOS- Religious angst subscale
|
8 IV
|
ANOVA- Religious Angst: Higher levels of body dissatisfaction (F (33, 234) = 1.38, p = 0.09).
|
Gluck et al. (2002) (USA) [39]
|
BSQ
|
Orthodox Traditions Scale
|
9 IV
|
ANOVA- Secular women had higher body dissatisfaction then orthodox women (F[1, 125] = 8.0, p = .005).
|
FRS
|
RIQ
|
Logistic Regression- Secular students 2x likely to have a fear of becoming fat (odds ratio [Exp (B)] = 2.3, p = .05) + 4x likely to be greatly influenced by their shape and weight (odds ratio [Exp (B)] = 3.8, p = .001).
|
MLR- Religious grouping: 6 % total BSQ (R2 = .06; p < .03).
|
Hayman et al. (2007) (USA) [46]
|
OBC
|
FMS- 20 items
|
10 IV
|
Correlation- Whole sample: No sig. Women: No sig, Men: spirituality and body surveillance (r = −.41, p = .001).
|
VAS
|
CDRS
|
Homan et al. (2013) (USA) [45]
|
BAOS
|
AGI
|
10 IV
|
Correlation- AG- Anxiety: Body Appreciation (r = −.28, p < .01), Body Acceptance by others (r = −.22, p < .05), Body Surveillance (r = −.33, p < .01).
|
BAS
|
1 item ‘How religious are you’
|
AG- Avoidance: Body Surveillance (r = −.21, p < .05).
|
OBC- Body Surveillance
|
1 item frequency of worship attendance
|
Regression- AG- Anxiety: predicted Body Appreciation (B = −.22, p = .038) and Body Surveillance (B = −.29, p = .008).
|
| |
AG-Avoidance: no sig
|
Homan et al. (2010) (USA) [28]
|
Perceived Sociocultural Pressure Scale (Stice, n.d.)
|
AGI
|
9 IIb
|
Correlation- AGI (Anxiety): Pressure to be thin (r = .22, p < .01), Thin-ideal Internalisation (r = .30, p < .001), Body Dissatisfaction (r = .25, p < .001), Dieting (r = .26, p < .001). AGI (Avoidance): Body Dissatisfaction (r = .18, p < .001).
|
SATAQ- Internalisation subscale
|
Regression- Thin-ideal Internalisation predicted body dissatisfaction in secure and anxious relationship groups (t(222) = 2.31, p < .02, R2 = .08 vs. R2 = .27). Secure relationship buffers this relationship.
|
MBSRQ- Body Areas Satisfaction subscale
|
Hierarchical regression- Anxious group- Body Dissatisfaction predicted by Pressure to be Thin (R2 = .03, p < .05), Thin Ideal Internalisation (R2 = .03, p < .05). Secure group- not sig.
|
DRES
| |
Inman et al. (2014) (USA) [26]
|
BE
|
Demographic Survey- Self reported importance of religion
|
10 IIb
|
ANOVA- Feelings of love and acceptance between the four statement groups (F(3, 106) = 8.22, p < .001). Religious (Mnonbody = 7.59, Mbody = 7.41) greater then Non-Religious (Mcontrol = 5.22, Mpositive = 6.73) (t(106) = 4.08, p < .001).
|
EDI- DT, BD
|
GCS
|
2 way ANCOVA- Appearance Esteem between the different statement groups not sig (F(3, 101) = .29, p = .83). Affirmation group x religious commitment interaction (F(3, 101) = 2.99, p < .04, η2 = .08).
|
RDS
|
RCS
|
Weight esteem between the different statement groups not sig (F(3, 101) = .52, p = .60), Affirmation group x religious commitment interaction (F(3, 101) = 3.42, p < .03, η2 = .09).
|
Emotions
|
Correlation- Religious Commitment: Appearance Esteem (r = .20, p < .05), Weight Esteem (r = .19, p < .05), Body Dissatisfaction (r = −.21, p < .05).
|
Partial Correlation (control for general commitment)- Religious commitment: Body Dissatisfaction (r = −.20, p < .05).
|
Inman (2014) (USA) [27]
|
BE
|
RCS
|
10 IIb
|
ANOVA- no sig differences between groups.
|
Emotions
|
2 way ANOVA- religiously committed men had higher Appearance Esteem at time 1 then less religious men (F(1, 48) = 17.76, p = .001, η2 = .27.). No sig interactions.
|
Correlation- Religious commitment: higher Appearance (r = .34, p < .05) and Weight Esteem (r = .35, p < .01).
|
Hierarchical regression and simple slope analysis: Religious commitment moderated the effect of harmful media on Weight Esteem in heavy men.
|
Jacobs-Pilipski et al. (2005) (USA) [33]
|
EDI-2- BD
|
Brief COPE
|
9 IV
|
ANOVA- No significant relationships between S/R beliefs/practices and Body Dissatisfaction.
|
13-item self-report measure of spiritual and religious beliefs and practices.
|
T- Test- Women with strong S/R beliefs/practices more likely to read religious works (T = 7.3, p = .000), pray (T = 9.3, p = .000) and meditate (T = 3.8 p = .007) than women without strong S/R beliefs/practices.
|
Women with strong S/R beliefs/practices less likely to use distraction to cope with body image distress (T = 2.7, p = .007) and reported prayer to be an effective strategy for dealing with dissatisfaction with weight and shape (T = 3.0, p = .004).
|
Kim (2006) (USA) [20]
|
EDI- BD
|
Compilation of measures- religious practice, application, commitment, identity, coping, social support
|
11 IV
|
Regression (controlling BMI + demographics).
|
Men- Body satisfaction: positive spiritual coping (beta = 0.18, p < 0.05), negative spiritual coping (beta = −0.58, p < 0.01). Closer relationship with God (beta = 0.14, p < 0.05). All religious variables (R2 = 0.174, p < 0.05).
|
Women- Body satisfaction: positive spiritual coping (beta = 0.19, p < 0.01), negative spiritual coping (beta = −0.47, p < 0.01), spending more hours on religious and spiritual activities (beta = 0.01, p < 0.01), prayer (beta = 0.23, p < 0.05). All religious variables (R2 = 0.106, p < 0.01).
|
Mahoney et al. (2005) (USA) [31]
|
MBSRQ- Body Areas Satisfaction and Appearance Orientation subscales
|
Manifestation of God in the Body scale.
|
9 IV
|
Partial Correlation (BMI + gender controlled)- Body area satisfaction: Manifestation of God (r = .13,p < .05), Sacred Qualities (r = .25, p < .001) and Global Religiousness (r = .13, p < .05).
|
Sacred Qualities of the Body scale.
|
Hierarchical regression- Body area satisfaction- Step 1: Race, gender, global religiousness (R2 Change = .05, p < .01), Step 2: Manifestation of God, Sacred Qualities (R2 Change = .04, p < .01).
|
Global Religiousness Score
|
Weinberger-Litman et al. (2008) (USA) [44]
|
BSQ
|
Self-reported level of religious observance
|
10 IV
|
ANOVA- Religious Orientation: Body Satisfaction (F = 6.15, p < .001). Intrinsic > extrinsic (p = .01), pro-religious (p < .001). ANCOVA- (control age, BMI, religious observance, anxiety and depression)- all remain sig
|
ROS
|
ANOVA- Spiritual Well-Being: High > Moderate (F = 4.57, p = .03, d = .27) Body Satisfaction. Existential Well-Being: High > Moderate (F = 18.23, p < .001, d = .51) Body Satisfaction. ANCOVA- (control age, BMI, religious observance)- all remain sig, (control anxiety and depression)- loose sig.
|
SWB
|