Participant information sheet. Participants were asked to report their age, gender, height, weight, ethnicity, smoking and exercise engagement.
The
Sussex-Oxford Compassion for the Self (SOCS-S; Gu et al., 2020 (
link)) is a 20-item scale containing 5 sub-scales (
Recognising suffering; Understanding the universality of suffering; Feeling for the person suffering; Tolerating uncomfortable feelings; Acting or being motivated to act to alleviate suffering). Total scores were calculated and used within the analysis; with the higher the score meaning higher levels of self-compassion. Responses were recorded using a 5-point Likert scale (1 =
Not at all true, 2 =
Rarely true, 3 =
Sometimes true, 4 =
Often true, 5 =
Always true), sample items include: “I notice when I’m feeling distressed” and “I connect with my own suffering without judging myself”. Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega were used to assess the scale reliability for the SOCS-S in the present research (α = 0.95, ω = 0.95).
The
Body Image Acceptance and Action Questionnaire -5 (BI-AAQ-5; Basarkod, Sahdra & Ciarrochi, 2018 (
link)) is a short form of the
Body image – Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (BI-AAQ-5) which aims to assess body image acceptance. Total scores were calculated and used within the analysis; with a higher score meaning lower levels of body-acceptance (
or higher levels of body non-acceptance). The BI-AAQ-5 is a 5-item scale where responses are recorded using a 7-point Likert scale (1 =
Always true and 7 =
Never true). Sample items include:
“Worrying about my weight makes it difficult for me to live a life that I value” and “I shut down when I feel bad about my body shape or weight”. Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega were used to assess the scale reliability for the BI-AAQ in the present research (α = 0.92, ω = 0.92).
The
Dresden Body Image Questionnaire (DBIQ; Scheffers et al., 2017 ) is a 35-item questionnaire with positively and negatively worded statements comprising of five subscales (
Body Acceptance, Vitality, Physical Contact, Sexual Fulfilment and Self-aggrandizement). The DBIQ aims to assess body image, with higher scores meaning higher levels of a more positive perception of body image; total scores were calculated and used within the analysis. Responses were recorded using a 5-point Likert scale (1 =
Not at all true, 2 =
Rarely true, 3 =
Sometimes true, 4 =
Often true, 5 =
Always true), sample items include: “I wish I had a different body” and “I use my body to attract attention”. Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega were used to assess the scale reliability for the BDIQ in the present research (α = 0.91, ω = 0.91).
The
Mindful Eating Behaviour Scale (MEBS; Winkens et al., 2018 (
link)) is a 20-item scale, and has 5 subscales (
Focused Eating, Eating with Awareness, Eating without Distraction, Hunger and Satiety Cues). Total scores were calculated and used within the analysis; with a higher score meaning higher levels of mindful eating. Responses were recorded using a 4-point Likert scale (1 =
Never to 4 =
Usually), sample items include: “I wish I could control my eating more easily” and “I trust my body to tell me when to eat”. Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega were used to assess the scale reliability for the MEBS in the present research (α = 0.80, ω = 1.08).
The Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ-15; Gu et al., 2016 (
link)) is a 15-item scale, and comprises of 5 subscales (
Observing items, Describe items, Acting with awareness items, Non-judging items, Non-reactivity items). Total scores were calculated and used within the analysis; with the higher the score meaning higher levels of mindfulness. Responses were recorded using a 5-point Likert scale (1 =
Never or very rarely true to 5 =
Very often or always true), sample items include: “I’m good at finding words to describe my feelings” and “I find myself doing things without paying attention”. Cronbach’s alpha for the FFMQ in the present research was
α = 0.67. McDonald’s omega was used to assess the scale reliability for the FFMQ in the present research, but the low association of the items and the proposed poor model fit did not allow for a score until Observe items (i.e., 1, 6, and 11) and Item 5 (non-reactivity) were removed (ω = 0.62).
Regan H., Keyte R., Mantzios M, & Egan H. (2023). The Mediating Role of Body Acceptance in Explaining the Relation of Mindfulness, Self-Compassion and Mindful Eating to Body Image in Gay Men and Bisexual Men. Mindfulness, 14(3), 596-605.