Body-related shame disrupts attentional focus over time in adolescence
Madison F. Vani and Kristen M. Lucibello equally contributed as co-first authorship.
Abstract
Introduction
Body-related shame is a negative self-conscious emotion that is heightened during adolescence and is associated with several adverse outcomes. Of particular interest, and informed by Objectification Theory, body-related shame may impact attentional focus because the experience of this intense emotion may limit cognitive resources required to effectively engage in tasks. The purpose of the present study was to examine the association between body-related shame and attentional focus over time during adolescence.
Methods
Adolescents (n = 160; Mage ± SD = 16.05 ± 0.98; 80% self-identifying girls) completed an online survey in 2022 at baseline (Time 1) and 3 months later (Time 2). Stepwise regression was used to test the association between body-related shame and attentional focus, with weight perception included as a covariate.
Results
The regression model demonstrated that higher body-related shame predicted poorer attentional focus 3 months later (β = −0.44, p < .001), after controlling for weight perception (14% variance explained in attention).
Conclusions
Findings support and extend theoretical tenets by highlighting the potential importance of targeting body-related shame to reduce the negative impact on attentional focus among adolescents.
1 INTRODUCTION
Body image, how one sees, thinks, feels, and behaves related to their body, is a multidimensional construct involving perceptual, cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions (Cash & Smolak, 2011). Social status and appearance are particularly salient during adolescence, and coupled with experiencing puberty-related physical changes, can contribute to heightened negative body image during this unique period of life (Markey, 2010; Reel et al., 2015). Within the affective dimension of body image, internal body-related shame is a negatively-valanced self-conscious emotion that is experienced when an individual evaluates the self as a whole and feels they fail to meet internalized and valued body ideals (Tracy & Robins, 2004). Critically, the emphasis on the body during adolescence makes it a particularly vulnerable time for experiencing increased body-related shame (Sabiston et al., 2022). Drawing from Objectification Theory, sexual objectification and self-objectification intensify in adolescence and can elicit body-related shame and disrupt flow (Fredrickson et al., 1997). Flow, defined as complete absorption in a task (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990), is prevented when an individual's attention is diverted to their body as a consequence of being sexually objectified (Fredrickson et al., 1997). The multidimensional nature of body image means that changes in one dimension (e.g., affect) could impact other dimensions (e.g., cognitive; Cash, 2012). As a result, negative body image during adolescence may negatively impact learning and performance outcomes (Vuilleumier, 2005) that are foundational to academic, sport, and social achievements.
Although body-related shame has been associated with several adverse outcomes (e.g., depressive symptoms, disordered eating behaviors, worse sport experiences; Kim et al., 2011; Mendes et al., 2021; Pila et al., 2020; Szymanski & Henning, 2007; Tracy & Robins, 2004), it is of particular interest to explore the link between body-related shame and attention. Broadly, emotions impact attention because emotional information is prioritized in cognitive processing (Vuilleumier, 2005). More specifically, self-conscious emotions play a central role in individuals' thoughts and behaviours (Tracy & Robins, 2004), and therefore may draw cognitive resources away from other tasks. Based on Objectification Theory, a chronic focus on the body (i.e., body surveillance) is predicted to increase experiences of body-related shame and deplete attentional resources for specific tasks (Fredrickson et al., 1997). While correlational and experimental evidence demonstrates that individuals who are focused on their body perform inadequately on cognitive and motor tasks (Cox et al., 2020; Fredrickson & Harrison, 2005; Fredrickson et al., 1998; Hebl et al., 2004; Quinn et al., 2006, 2010), less is known about the association between body-related shame and attentional focus (i.e., the ability to sustain cognitive resources on specific tasks while inhibiting body-related distractions; Judah et al., 2014).
Among the limited research on body-related shame and cognitive performance (Greenleaf, 2005; Quinn et al., 2010; Szymanski & Henning, 2007), there are mixed findings. Two cross-sectional studies reported a negative correlation between body-related shame and flow states (Greenleaf, 2005; Szymanski & Henning, 2007). Another study found no correlation between body-related shame and cognitive performance on a modified Stroop task (Quinn et al., 2006, 2010). These cross-sectional studies were limited to adult women samples. Despite evidence demonstrating cisgender men and transgender men and women also experience body-related shame (Strübel et al., 2020), the association between body-related shame and cognitive performance has not been examined in other genders. In addition, examining the body-related shame and cognitive performance association among adolescents may be especially important because body-related shame is heightened during this period (Reimer, 1996; Sabiston et al., 2022). Further, findings related to cognitive performance among adults may not generalize to adolescents because this developmental stage involves unique cognitive maturation including potential difficulties with sustained attention (Luna et al., 2010). Thus, testing the link between body-related shame and attentional focus among gender-varying adolescents is valuable. Further, directionality cannot be inferred from previous literature because of the cross-sectional study designs. Body-related shame may reduce attentional focus, yet this assertion has not been tested. Body-related shame can be experienced at the trait level given the pervasiveness of body ideals that act as consistent prompts and antecedents to the emotion (Noll & Fredrickson, 1998). Trait body-related shame (i.e., a general propensity to experiencing body-related shame) is an aversive emotion that has been related to avoidance tendencies (Schmader & Lickel, 2006) and has longitudinally predicted lower body responsiveness (i.e., valuing of information from the body; Lamont, 2015). Thus, trait body-related shame may contribute to an increased and consistent disruption of available cognitive resources, which may lower attention on general cognitive or motor tasks. Using a longitudinal design to test these associations over time will help to elucidate body-related shame as a useful modifiable target for reducing the disruptive impact on attention.
The aim of the present study was to examine the association between body-related shame and attentional focus over time for adolescents. Aligned with Objectification Theory (Fredrickson et al., 1997) and previous literature (Greenleaf, 2005; Szymanski & Henning, 2007), it was hypothesized that higher levels of body-related shame would be associated with lower attentional focus on specific tasks. Weight perception was included as a covariate based on previously reported associations between weight perception and cognitive outcomes (Livermore et al., 2020). Specifically, adolescents who have reported weight perceptions of overweight and underweight have lower academic performance, regardless of their body mass index.
2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1 Participants and procedure
This study was conducted in 2022 within a longitudinal study exploring the associations among weight-related experiences, body image, and physical activity in adolescents (Lucibello et al., 2023). Participants were recruited through social media (Twitter and Instagram) and local organizations in the Greater Toronto Area. Adolescents were eligible to participate if they were between 14 and 17 years old and able to read English. Once parental consent and participant assent were received, adolescents completed an online survey using Research Electronic Data Capture (Time 1, January/February 2022) and indicated interest in being contacted for a follow-up survey 3 months later (Time 2, April−June 2022). Notably, government public health restrictions due to COVID-19 were in place across Canada at the beginning of Time 1, which gradually eased over time and into Time 2. Schools were briefly closed and many social and recreational activities resumed with public safety guidelines (e.g., mask-wearing, reduced number of people). Participants were entered into a draw to win one of ten $25 gift cards for their participation at Time 1 and received a $20 gift card for their participation at Time 2. All study procedures were approved by the University of Toronto Research Ethics Board.
2.2 Measures
2.2.1 Demographic information
Adolescents self-reported their gender (girl, boy, and another gender), age, and ethnicity.
2.2.2 Weight perception
Participants' perception of body weight was assessed by indicating whether they perceived themselves as too thin, about right, a little too heavy, or much too heavy (Lucibello et al., 2021).
2.2.3 Body-related shame
The shame subscale of the Body and Appearance Self-Conscious Emotions Scale (Castonguay et al., 2014) was used to assess body-related shame. Participants responded to four items (e.g., “ashamed of the way I look”) on a scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always), with a higher mean score reflecting more frequent experiences of body-related shame (ω = 0.92). Adequate factor structure and internal consistency have been found in adolescents (Chiminazzo et al., 2021; Lucibello et al., 2022).
2.2.4 Attention
The Focusing subscale of the Attentional Control Scale (Derryberry, 2002; Judah et al., 2014) was used to assess attentional focus. Participants responded to seven items (e.g., “when trying to focus my attention on something, I have difficulty blocking out distracting thoughts”) on a scale from 1 (almost never) to 4 (always), with a higher subscale total representing better self-reported attentional focus (ω = 0.91). Adequate factor structure and internal consistency have been noted in adolescent samples (Azarmehr & Ahmadi, 2020; Verstraeten et al., 2010).
2.3 Statistical analysis
Analyses were conducted in IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 28. Data were initially screened for outliers (>3 SDs) and missing data (0.01%, addressed using item-level mean imputation). Parametric statistical assumptions for regression (i.e., normality, homoscedasticity, normally-distributed residuals) were also confirmed. Descriptive statistics, Pearson's bivariate correlations, and reliability coefficients (ω; McDonald, 1999) were computed. Gender differences and weight perception differences in body-related shame and attentional focus were explored using the one-way analysis of variance. Finally, the association between body-related shame and attentional focus over time was tested using a stepwise regression. The covariate of Time 1 weight perception (too thin, about right, too heavy) was added in Step 1 (Livermore et al., 2020), Time 1 shame was added in Step 2, and Time 2 attentional focus was included as the dependent variable. A power analysis estimated that a minimum sample size of 133 would offer sufficient power (0.80) to detect a small-to-medium effect (0.06) with an alpha level of p = .05 (Faul et al., 2009).
3 RESULTS
Of the 167 adolescents who provided informed consent and assent, seven were excluded for not completing any shame items. As a result, the final analytic sample included 160 adolescents (Mage ± SD = 16.05 ± 0.98). The sample was predominantly girls (80.0%, n = 128), followed by another gender (10.6%, n = 17), boys (8.1%, n = 13), and prefer not to say (1.25%, n = 2). The sample most commonly identified as White (41.3%, n = 66), South Asian (13.8%, n = 22), Chinese (12.5%, n = 20), multiple population groups (11.9%, n = 19), and Black (8.1%, n = 13). No other population group was identified by above 2% of the sample. With respect to weight perceptions, 8.8% of the sample perceived their body as “too thin,” 38.4% perceived their body as “about right,” 35.2% perceived their body as “a little too heavy,” and 17.6% perceived their body as “much too heavy.”
Significant differences in body-related shame (boys = 3.06 ± 1.32, girls = 2.98 ± 1.08, another gender = 3.78 ± 0.82) but not attentional focus (p = .10, boys = 17.31 ± 4.73, girls = 16.47 ± 5.41, another gender = 13.62 ± 6.06) were noted between genders [F(2, 155) = 2.35, p = .02].
Significant differences for body-related shame (too thin = 2.52 ± 1.21, about right = 2.39 ± 0.88, too heavy = 3.66 ± 0.90) but not attentional focus were also noted between weight perceptions [F(2, 155) = 35.72, p < .001]. Correlations were in the expected strength and direction and can be found in Table 1.
| M (SD) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. T1 Weight perception | - | - | |||
| 2. T1 Age | 16.03 (0.98) | −0.06 [−0.22 to 0.09] | - | ||
| 3. T1 Body-related shame | 3.12 (1.08) | 0.48* [0.35−0.59] | 0.02 [−0.14 to 0.17] | - | |
| 4. T2 Attentional focus | 16.20 (5.47) | −0.08 [−0.23 to 0.07] | −0.03 [−0.19 to 0.12] | −0.38* [−0.50 to −0.24] | - |
- Note: T1 = Time 1 (January/February 2022), T2 = Time 2 (April/May/June 2022). The bivariate correlation between body-related shame and attentional focus was significant (p < .05) for girls (r = −0.41, 95% CI: −0.55 to −0.24) and nonsignificant (p > .05) for boys (r = −0.46, 95% CI: −0.86 to 0.29) and those identifying as another gender (r = −0.04, 95% CI: −0.52 to 0.47). The association between T2 body-related shame and T2 attentional focus was also significant (r = −0.28 [−0.42 to −0.13].
- *p < .01.
The overall model examining the association between body-related shame and attentional focus over time was significant [R2 = 0.14 F(2, 156) = 14.13, p < .001], accounting for 14% of the variance in Time 2 attention. More specifically, after controlling for weight perception, higher body-related shame predicted poorer attentional focus 3 months later (β = −0.44, p < .001), see Table 2. Notably, the association between T1 body-related shame and T2 attentional focus remained consistent when controlling for other relevant covariates such as gender and age (Fredrickson et al., 1997; Grabe et al., 2007). Because these variables were not significantly related to attentional focus in the model and did not explain additional variance, the most parsimonious model was presented.
| Model information | B (SE) | β | t [95% CI] | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Step 1 | F(1, 157) = 1.14, p = .29, R2 = 0.1% | |||
| T1 Weight perception | −0.71 (0.67) | −0.09 | −1.07 [−2.03 to 0.61] | |
| Step 2 | F(2, 156) = 14.13, p < .001, ΔF = 26.92, R2 = 14.2% | |||
| T1 Weight perception | 1.04 (0.70) | 0.12 | 1.47 [−0.35 to 2.43] | |
| T2 Body-related shame | −2.17 (0.42) | −0.44 | −5.19* [−3.00 to −1.35] |
- Note: *p < .01.
- Abbreviations: T1, Time 1 (January/February 2022); T2, Time 2 (April/June 2022). While not significant, the coefficient for T1 weight perception may be positive in Step 2 as a result of a spurious association with body-related shame. There was no evidence of multicollinearity.
4 DISCUSSION
The purpose of the present study was to examine the association between body-related shame and attentional focus over time. Aligned with the study hypothesis, results demonstrated that body-related shame is a prospective predictor of self-reported attentional focus among adolescents. Importantly, the demonstrated association offers preliminary support for the need to mitigate body-related shame among adolescents and has implications for various life domains (e.g., school and employment) and general well-being.
The negative association between body-related shame and self-reported attentional focus is generally consistent with previous cross-sectional research findings demonstrating body-related shame reduced flow states (Greenleaf, 2005; Szymanski & Henning, 2007). The present findings extend these preliminary cross-sectional relationships (Greenleaf, 2005; Szymanski & Henning, 2007) and Objectification Theory tenets (Fredrickson et al., 1997) by providing support for the longitudinal link between body-related shame and attentional focus among adolescents. Experiencing body-related shame during adolescence could disrupt the dedication of cognitive resources needed to effectively engage in tasks, potentially hindering performance in academic, social, sport, and occupational domains. Given the range of unfavorable potential implications a disruption of attentional focus can have for adolescents (e.g., lower academic and sport performance; Rueda et al., 2010; Wang et al., 2021), targeting body-related shame to reduce the negative impact on attention is necessary. Strategies that may be useful in reducing body-related shame among adolescents include self-compassion exercises (e.g., writing and imagery exercises; Gilbert & Irons, 2004, 2005; Leary et al., 2007) and cognitive dissonance-based psychoeducation (Smith & Petrie, 2008). Determining the most effective body-related shame-reducing strategy for adolescents would be a worthwhile research endeavor. Once determined, it would be advantageous to facilitate a shame-reducing intervention for adolescents with the goal of assessing change in attentional focus.
This study lays the groundwork for important avenues of future research. First, in addition to the present findings, the established associations between self-objectification/body surveillance and body-related shame (Moradi & Huang, 2008; Pila et al., 2021; Slater & Tiggemann, 2010) indicate that body-related shame could play a mechanistic role in the associations between self-objectification/body surveillance and attentional focus. Researchers should further examine Objectification Theory by looking at the possible mechanistic associations over time. Second, while body-related shame is the most intense body-related self-conscious emotion (Sabiston et al., 2021; Tracy & Robins, 2004) and is the only self-conscious emotion explicitly identified in Objectification Theory (Fredrickson et al., 1997), other negative body-related self-conscious emotions (e.g., embarrassment, guilt, and envy) may also contribute to the diminishment of attentional focus during adolescence. Research on the associations of these other emotions and attentional focus is needed and may be facilitated by appropriate measures of guilt (Castonguay et al., 2014), envy (Lucibello et al., 2022), and embarrassment (Vani et al., revise and resubmit). Relatedly, body-related shame was contextualized to appearance in this study, yet shame contextualized to the body's function (Castonguay et al., 2016) may also be associated with attentional focus. Future work should examine the associations between fitness shame and attention, as well as the potential unique contributions of appearance and fitness self-conscious emotions in predicting attentional focus.
There are some study limitations that should be discussed. While adolescents identifying with varying gender identities (e.g., boys and nonbinary) were included in the study, the sample was predominantly comprised of girls, which limits the generalizability. Further, a distinction of cisgender girls/boys was not collected. There are gender differences in self-objectification and body surveillance (Brewster et al., 2019; Strübel et al., 2020), which can impact body-related shame and attentional focus. Additionally, body-related shame may be influenced by varying sources (e.g., gender identity congruence) and experienced differently across the gender spectrum (Romito et al., 2021; Strübel et al., 2020), requiring careful attention in future research. Moreover, the sample was underpowered to test interactions among covariates that may relate to the association between body-related shame and attentional focus (i.e., a weight perception of too thin in boys vs. girls). Future adequately powered research to test these interactions as well as other identity considerations is warranted. In addition, although attentional focus was assessed using a validated measure (Derryberry, 2002; Judah et al., 2014), some researchers have suggested taking caution with interpreting this measure as a direct reflection of cognitive performance (Williams et al., 2017). Hence, while beyond the scope of the present work, future research should consider employing an objective cognitive performance measure (e.g., Attention Network Test, Fan et al., 2002; Modified Switching Task, Suchy & Kosson, 2006) to further elucidate the relationship between body-related shame and attention. Finally, in addition to body-related shame and weight perceptions, other unmeasured factors may disrupt attentional focus among adolescents (e.g., attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and anxiety symptoms; Brooker et al., 2020). These additional factors, as appropriate, should be included in future investigations of attentional focus.
5 CONCLUSION
This study offers initial evidence for a longitudinal association between body-related shame and self-reported attentional focus. The findings provide support for the harmful role affective body image, specifically body-related shame, can have on cognitive outcomes. Overall, the results highlight the potential importance of targeting body-related shame to reduce some of the negative impact on attentional focus, as attention deficits can affect adolescent cognitive performance across life domains.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
MFV is supported by a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and a Mitacs Accelerate Postdoctoral Fellowship, and a Sport Participation Research Initiative supplement. KML is supported by a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Postdoctoral Fellowship, and was supported by a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Doctoral Fellowship during data collection and manuscript preparation. CMS holds a Canada Research Chair in Physical Activity and Mental Health. Funding for this project was provided through a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council insight grant awarded to the last author. Funding sources were not involved in the study design, data collection, analysis or interpretation, or the preparation of the manuscript for publication. MFV and KML are co- first authors.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
ETHICS STATEMENT
Approval was obtained from the ethics committee of University of Toronto (#00040089).
Open Research
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
