상담학연구 * -,, ,,....,.,.,... * 2011 ( ) (NRF B00234). (Corresponding Author): / / Tel: /

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "상담학연구 * -,, ,,....,.,.,... * 2011 ( ) (NRF B00234). (Corresponding Author): / / Tel: /"

Transcription

1 * -,, ,,....,.,.,... * 2011 ( ) (NRF B00234). (Corresponding Author): / / Tel: /

2 %. 58.9% (, ) (, ) (, ).. 760, 44% (40%), (25%), (18%), (8%) (, ). (2009) 35.8%, 52.7% (,,, 2009). 35.6%, 71.3% 29.5%, 72.5%. 10.9%, 24.8%,,,, (,,, 2009).,., (,, 2012)., (Choate, 2007;,, 2009 ). (,, 2010), (,, 2012) (,, 2010;, 1998) (,, 2009). (,, 2010),.

3 (,,,, 2007). (Herman & Polivy, 1980). (, 2003;,, 2006; Polivy & Herman, 1985).,,.,. (Stein, et al., 1991;,, 2001 )... (Cattarin & Thompson, 1994; Stice & Hoffman, 2004; Shroff & Thompson, 2006 ).,,,, (, 2006;,,, 2007). (,, 2005;,,, 2007;, 2008;, 2010; Attie & Brooks-Gunn, 1989; Corning, Krumm, & Smitham, 2006; Stice & Shaw, 2002)..,,,,,, (2007). (2010),,., (Heinberg & Thompson, 1992; Keery, den Berg, & Thompson, 2004; Stormer & Thompson, 1996).,. (Coopersmith, 1967), (Rosenberg, 1965). (Leary, Schreindorfer & Haupt, 1995; Polivy & Herman, 2002; Striegel-

4 Moore & Cachelin, 2001;, 2008 ).,,,, (2008), Thompson (1999).,, (2010).,.,.,.,,.,.. (Weltzin et al., 2005), (,,, 2008 ).,,.,,. (2010). 1) 1) (2010).,,...,, (p.51,, 2013), (2013) (p.51).,, -

5 (, 2003) (, 2010). (, 2009) (between-groups design) (critical), (cross-culturally),., ( ) (,, 2010), (Vohs, Heatherton, & Herrin, 1999) (Rapp- Paglicci, Dulmus, & Wodarski, 2004), (stressors),,, (Compas, Wagner, Slavin, & Vannatta, 1986; Rosen, Compas, & Tacy, 1993) (sample-specific), (2010) (p.810 ) (Heppner, Wampold, & Kivlighan, 2008). (, 2006).,.,,..., (, 2005) (, 1993)., (Weltzin et al., 2005), (,, 2012). (,, 2010), (,,, 2008).. (2010), 1, 2.

6 ...,?,,,? (56.9%), 207 (43.1%), (SD=0.74) (55.0%), (33.1%), 3 33 (6.9%), 24 (5.0%). 464 (96.7%),, 10 (2.1%), 6 (1.2%). (,, ) 1.. Rosenberg(1965) (1974). (self-worth) (self- (n = 273) (n = 207) kg 38-97kg (SD) 64.66kg(11.12) 53.56kg(8.08) cm cm (SD) cm(5.39) cm(5.20) (BMI) (SD) 21.39(3.40) 22.10(19.87)

7 acceptance) 5, 5 4. (1 ) (4 ).. Rosenberg (1965) Cronbach s.82, Cronbach s.80. Thompson, Heinberg, Tantleff(1991) (Physical Appearance Comparison Scale; PACS) 5 Tiggemann McGill(2004) (Specific Attributes Comparison Scale; SACS) 3. PACS 5 (2008) (,, 2010, ). (1 ) (5 ). Thompson (1991) Cronbach s.78, (2010).66, Cronbach s.71. SACS,, 5 (1 ) (5 ). 1 ( ), 4 ( ) , 5,. Tiggemann McGill (2004) Cronbach s.81, (2010).80, Cronbach s.81. (Eating Disorder Inventory-2: EDI-2) (1997) (Garner, 1991;, 1997 ). EDI ,,,,,,,,,,. (1997) 7, 7, (1 ) (6 ). (1997) Cronbach s.76 Cronbach s.84.

8 (2001). 5, 5, (1 ) (7 ), (1 ) (7 ). (2010). (2001) Cronbach s.75,.92. Cronbach s.84,.94. Cronbach s a,.,. 2 7 West, Finch Curran(1995), Mahalanobis d-squared.,,,. Anderson Gerbing(1988) 2,. Russel, et al.,(1988) 3 (item-parcel)..,, RMSEA, TLI, CFI. RMSEA.05.08,.10 (Hu & Bentler, 1999)., TLI CFI (, 2007). (Bootstrap) 10,000 95%.. PASW Statistic 18.0 AMOS 18.0.,, 2.,,,,..

9 M SD ** **.44** *.52**.53** *p<.05, **p<.01.,,, 3.., (df = 59, N=480)= ** **.63** ** -.19** -.09* ** ** -.16** -.12**.63**.31** ** -.23** -.18**.29**.13**.51** ** -.26** -.23**.26**.13**.47**.79** ** -.13** -.13**.28**.07.38**.55**.59** * -.12* **.22**.54**.44**.37**.35** * **.38**.21**.56**.56**.49**.41**.76** * **.27**.16**.49**.48**.39**.32**.72**.76** **.17**.50**.48**.40**.34**.69**.75**.83** - M SD , 2, 3 3, 4, , 8, 9 3, 10, 11, 12, *p<.05, **p<.01.

10 *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***. ***p< (p=.000) TLI=.941, CFI=.955 RMSEA= ,.36.94,.64.90, (p<.001) TLI CFI.90 RMSEA.09. =

11 df TLI CFI RMSEA ,,, 3.. ( = -.21, p<.001) ( =-.21, p<.001).. ( =.53, p<.001) ( =.42, p<.001),. ( =.34, p<.001). (Bootstrap) ,,.

12 -.21*** -.21*** -.21*** -.11*** ( ) -.32*** -.20*** ( ) -.20***.53***.53***.42***.18*** (.13.25).61***.34***.34***. ***p<.001. ( ), 7.,,,.,,,,.., 8. M SD ** -.33** -.15* **.42** **.28** -.43** **.47** M SD ,. *p<.05, **p<.01

13 **.64** -.20** ** -.27** -.33** -.22** -.23** -.18* ** -.67** -.31** ** -.30** -.31** -.24** -.23** -.15* **.61** * ** -.14* -.21** -.17* * **.62**.27**.23**.30**.30**.32**.18**.24** ** -.33**.16* *.18**.17* * **.30** -.50**.46**.29**.46**.47**.35**.35** ** -.21** -.19**.13*.08.36** -.79**.41**.39**.43**.35**.34** ** -.25** -.22** **.71** -.46**.38**.44**.30**.29** **.49**.54** -.28**.32**.15*.16* **.25**.52**.36**.24**.28** -.76**.68**.64** **.20**.54**.53**.39**.33**.73** -.69**.68** **.23**.13*.51**.46**.33**.31**.72**.78** -.83** **.16**.50**.45**.34**.33**.69**.75**.80** M SD , 2, 3 3, 4, , 8, 9 3, 10, 11, 12, 13 2.,. *p<.05, **p<.01 M SD df TLI CFI RMSEA TLI.934, CFI.950, RMSEA.075, TLI.914, CFI.935, RMSEA

14 (n=273) (n=207) *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***p < *** *** *** *** *** *** , , , , , , , , TLI , CFI ,

15 df TLI CFI RMSEA (N=273) (N=207) RMSEA , TLI, CFI, RMSEA. =68.927, = ,,, 4. ( =-.11, p>.05). ( =-.27, p<.001).. ( =.39, p<.001) ( =.49, p<.001),,. ( =.34, p<.001),. ( =-.34, p<.01) ( =-.21, p<.01)

16 .. ( =.48, p<.001) ( =.32, p<.01),. ( =.29, p<.01),. 12.,.05.,. (p<.05).,,.., (n=273) (n=207) *** -.34*** -.27*** -.04 ( ) -.31*** -.21* -.16*** ( ) -.37*** -.16** ( ) -.16** -.22*** ( ) -.22***.39**.39**.48***.48***.49***.14** (.07.22).62***.32***.14** (.06.24).46***.35**.35**.29**.29**. *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

17 df TLI CFI RMSEA (, 2000). (, 2007) , 9.05.,.. (,,, 2012) , (df=13, p<.05). TLI -.040, CFI -.042, RMSEA (M.I),,,., (df=8, p<.05) TLI=-.019, CFI= -.020, RMSEA= df TLI CFI RMSEA

18 ,,..,,,.,. (2008), (2010) Thompson (1999) Leary, Schreindorfer Haupt(1995), Polivy Herman(2002), Striegel-Moore Cachelin(2001) (, 2008 ), Keery, den Berg Thompson (2004)..,,. (,, 2010).,..,.,.,..,. Piaget (, 2012).

19 .,,,.,,., (2010). (2010),.,.,.,, (2012) (2012)..., (,, 2012; Weltzin et al., 2005),....,

20 ...,., (drive for muscularity) (,, 2012; McCreary, Sasse, 2000; Parent & Moradi, 2011)., (,, 2012).,.,..,,,,,,,,, (2013). :. (2003).. :., (2010).. (4), , (2010) , (2012). :. (4), ,,, (2007).. (4), (2006)..,.,, (2008). : (gender difference) ,,,, (1993).. :., (2010).,,. (1),

21 , (2005). (Body Shape Questionnaire: BSQ) -. (4), , (2009). :. (3), (2009).,.,, (2007). -. (1), (1998)., (2007). :. (2003).,. (2010).,. (2008).,,,. (3), (2010). :,,. (4), ( ). 90%. detail.php?number=385295&thread=10r03.,, (2012). :. ( ).,. NewsRead.edy?SCD=JE51&newsid= &DCD=A00505&OutLnkChk=Y., (2006).. (4), , (2012). : (1997).. (1), (2006)..,.,, (2009). :. (1974).. (1), ,, (2012). :. (2), (2005).,. ( ). 3,? _3025.html. ( ).!. apps/news.sub_view?popup=0&nid=05&c1=05&c2

22 =01&c3=00&nkey= , (2001).. (4), , (2012).. (6), (2000).. (1), Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, Attie, I., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (1989). Development of eating problem in adolescent girls: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 25, Compas, B. E., Wagner, B. M., Slavin, L. A., & Vannatta, K. (1986). A prospective study of life events, social support, and psychological symptomatology during the transition from high school to college. American Journal of Community Psychology, 14, Coopersmith, S. (1967). Parental characteristics related to self-esteem. In S. Coopersmith (Ed.), Antecedents of self-esteem (pp ). San Francisco, CA: Freeman. Corning, A. F., Krumm, A. J., & Smitham, L. A. (2006). Differential social comparison processes in women with and without eating disorder symptoms. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, Herman, C. P., & Polivy, J. (1980). Restrained eating. In A. B. Stunkard (Ed.), Obesity (pp ). Philadelphia: Saunders. Heinberg, L. J., & Thompson, J. K. (1992). The effects of figure size feedback (positive vs. negative) and target comparison group (particularistic vs. universalistic) on body image disturbance. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 12, Heppner, P. P., Wampold, B. E., & Kivlighan, D. M. (2008). Research design in counseling (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thompson Higher Education. Hu, L. T., Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), Keery, H., van den Berg, P., & Thompson. J. K. (2004). An evaluation of the Tripartite Influence Model of body dissatisfaction and eating disturbance with adolescent girls. Body Image, 1, Leary, M. R., Schreindorfer, L. S., & Haupt, A. L. (1995). The role of low self-esteem and behavioral problems: Why is low self-esteem dysfuncional? Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 14, McCreary, D. R., & Sasse, D. K. (2000). An exploration of the drive for muscularity in adolescent boys and girls. Journal of American College Health, 48, Parent, M. C., & Moradi, B. (2011). His biceps become him: A test of objectification theory's application to drive for muscularity and propensity for steroid use in college men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, Polivy, J., & Herman, C. P. (1985). Dieting and binging: A causal analysis. American Psychologist, 40, Polivy, J., & Herman, C. P. (2002). Causes of eating

23 disorders. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, Rapp-Paglicci, L. A., Dulmus, C. N., & Wodarski, J. S. (2004). Handbook of preventive interventions for children and adolescents (Ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Rosen, J. C., Compas, B. E., & Tacy, B. (1993). The relation among stress, psychological symptoms, and eating disorder symptoms: A prospective analysis. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 14, Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and adolescent self image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Russell, D. W., Kahn, J. H., Spoth, R., & Altmaier, E. M. (1998). Analyzing data from experimental studies: A latent variable structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, Shroff, H., & Thompson, J. K. (2006). The tripartite influence model of body image and eating disturbance: A replication with adolescent girls. Body Image, 3, Stice, E., & Shaw, H. E. (2002). Role of body dissatisfaction in the onset and maintenance of eating pathology: A synthesis of research findings. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 53, Stice, E., & Hoffman, E. (2004). Eating disorder prevention programs. In J. K. Thompson (Ed.), Handbook of eating disorders and obesity (pp.33-57). New York: Wiley. Stormer, S. M., & Thompson, J. K. (1996). Explanations of body image disturbance: A test of maturational status, negative verbal commentary, social comparison, and sociocultural hypotheses. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 19, Striegel-Moore, R. H., & Cachelin, F. M. (2001). Etiology of eating disorders in woman. The Counseling Psychologist, 29, Thompson, J. K., Heinberg, L. J., & Tantleff, S. (1991). The Physical Appearance Comparison Scale (PACS). Behavior Therapist, 14, 174. Thompson, J. K., Heinberg, L, J., Altabe, M., & Tantleft-Dunn, S. (1999). Exacting beauty: Theory, assessment, and treatment of body image disturbance. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Tiggemann, M., & McGill, B. (2004). The role of social comparison in the effect of magazine advertisements on women s mood and body dissatisfaction. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, Vohs, K. D., Heatherton, T. F., & Herrin, M. (1999). Disordered eating and the transition to college: A prospective study. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 29, Weltzin, T. E., Weisensel, N., Franczyk, D., Burnett, K., Klitz, C., & Bean, P. (2005). Eating disorders in men update. The Journal of Men s Health and Gender, 2, West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation model with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp.56-75). Thousand Oaks: Sage. : : :

24 Mediating Effects of Physical Comparison and Body Dissatisfaction in the Relationship between Self-Esteem and Restrained Eating among Male and Female High School Students Gyeongsang University Yonsei University Dongguk University The relations among self-esteem, physical comparison, body dissatisfaction, and restrained eating have been established with university students. The current study purports to confirm the aforementioned relations with high school male and female students. Participants were 480 high school students in Gyeongsangnam-do area. We created a research model and an alternative model based on previous research and examined which model could better explain high school students restrained eating. In addition, a multi-group analysis was performed to investigate gender differences. Main study results are as follows. First, with high school students, the research model which hypothesized physical comparison and body dissatisfaction as partial mediators was found to be a better model compared to the alternative model. Second, the mediating effects of both physical comparison and body dissatisfaction in the relationship between self-esteem and restrained eating were significant. Third, the research model was found to be a better model than the alternative one both in the male and female high school students. Finally, latent means analyses by gender were not to be calculated because partial scalar invariance was dismissed in the multi-group analysis. Implications and limitations of the study were discussed. Key words : high school male/female students, self-esteem, restrained eating, physical comparison, body dissatisfaction, multi-group analysis