While the arrival of the "plus-size" model onto the runway and into the pages of high-fashion magazines like ELLE, Glamour and Vogue has been one of the buzziest topics of the fashion world this past year, it seems that ditching the uber-unrealistic size 0/2 models for women closer to the size-14 U.S. average might not be as ego-stroking for larger women as the world might think.In a controversial study released last week, researchers from Arizona State University, University of Cologne in Germany and Erasmus University in the Netherlands put fake ads similar to Dove's groundbreaking "Real Women" campaign to the test, showing hundreds of female participants who were overweight, underweight and normal weight a selection of images in which there was a variation of extremely thin, normal-weight and extremely large models.
"As a consumer and magazine reader, I was slightly surprised and saddened by the results," ASU researcher Naomi Mandel told Lemondrop about the outcome. "I enjoy looking at beautiful plus-size models such as Crystal Renn in the magazines. [But] we found that overweight women experienced lower self-esteem after looking at any models (versus an ad with no models) and underweight women experienced higher self-esteem after looking at any models (versus an ad with no models)."
Here's why she says that might happen.
"When overweight women look at thin models, they see the dissimilarities between themselves and the models, which activates knowledge that they are heavy," Mandel explained. "And when they look at heavy models, they see the similarities between themselves and the models, which also activates knowledge that they are heavy."
In other words, larger women don't like looking in the mirror when they open up a magazine or see an advertisement. The product alone, without a large or small model that they can subconsciously compare themselves to, is good enough, thank you.
To measure the participants yo-yo in self-esteem after seeing the images of models that were both similar and dissimilar to themselves, the researchers used what they call "nonconscious measures," Mandel says, "such as reaction times on a task where they had to press a key on a keyboard as quickly as possible to indicate whether they recognized a word or not."
Women were asked to respond to negative words such as "heavy" and "fat" and positive words like "thin" and "skinny."
"This is an established way to find out what knowledge is currently active in someone's mind," Mandel said.
And, oddly enough, it seems seeing an easy-to-relate-to tummy roll here and there isn't conjuring happy thoughts for heavier-set women, contrary to popular belief. But is this really the case? How does seeing women of larger sizes make you feel when you see an ad or magazine spread showing diverse shapes?












Comments:
Add a comment
Friday 26 March
By WWW.CUPIDONSEXTOYS.COM
interesting....but I dont agree with that! I do not worry about larger-size models....! :)
Regards, Cynthia Newman from http://www.cupidonsextoys.com
Reply
Friday 26 March
By lulu
I'm an average size woman (about a size 8) and I like the real models. I used to be very thin (about a size 2), when I was super skinny I never thought about models. Now that I'm average I do notice how skinny they are and it makes me feel insecure. I hate admitting that but its true.
Reply
Friday 26 March
By iambe
'Women were asked to respond to negative words such as "heavy" and "fat" and positive words like "thin" and "skinny." '
All of those words are negative and judgmental.
Personally, I like seeing pictures of models that look like me (I'm plus sized). I think that they are beautiful and when I notice the similarities it makes me feel beautiful, too. What I like is seeing diversity rather than just one body type presented as the only acceptable idea of beauty.
Reply
Friday 26 March
By liz
Personally, I see "skinny" and "fat" as negative, and "thin" and "heavy" as more neutral. There should probably be a better version of "heavy," but I think that it is used more commonly to just describe someone's body rather than judge. On the other hand, skinny seems to be describing someone who does not have a naturally small frame but rather someone who is either trying to hard to keep their weight low, or is underdeveloped. Who made the positive/negative qualification? Was it the study, the participants, or the author of the article? That answer will shed a lot of light on either how the study was performed, or how it was received.
As I would see it, a "thin" or "heavy" woman would have a body in some way defined - a smaller waist, a chest or hips, etc; a "skinny" or "fat" woman would be in some way shapeless, whether it is due to a lack of chest/backside/waist/definition or an excess of fat pockets/visible bones. And every one of these types of women have the potential to be very beautiful/attractive or very ugly/unattractive, albeit in different ways.
Wednesday 21 April
By Shelley Kazimour
I agree with you about the 'positive' and "negative" in this article. How can this research be considered reliable when the researcher is biased against 'plus-sized women'. Who is she to determine that 'thin' is a positive word? She also used harsher words to denote over weight, like heavy and fat, instead of over-weight or plus-size. Thin and skinny are not harsh words, she should have used scrawny and skeletal to give the wording equal balance. This research should be considered just what it is, GARBAGE. I certainly hope she didn't get any government grant money for this research. Sad enough she got published or did she, but there are mags and journals that will publish anything whether it is creditable or not. This is not creditable, nor scholastic, it's hate biased baloney.
Friday 26 March
By mary
I'd say I'm a average sized woman and I find 'real models' patronizing, it's wrapped in all this fell good sort of language about 'finding beauty in all woman' or what have you but it's just a marketing gimmick, nothing more.
Reply
Friday 26 March
By Kitty
thin women are just as 'beautiful' as a 'normal' woman. If someone likes your product, they'll buy it. Its not like we as consumers enjoy your annoying adds anyway.
Reply
Sunday 28 March
By Kristi
In my opinion:
"heavy" is a neutral word
"fat" is a negative word
"skinny" is a negative word
"thin" is a neutral word
and:
"fit" is a positive word!! Because all that really matters is that you are healthy (and confident)!
By the way, "fit" can be all different sizes. I myself am healthy at a size 0-2, but only because I am very small and short to begin with. I have very many beautiful, healthy women who could be on magazines at many different sizes!
Reply
Sunday 28 March
By Revvie
I'm actually very sad to see the results of this test. It just show cases how bad many people feel about themselves, when in reality they can be very beautiful. I'm 5'6" and 120, and I hate it, but I know I'm beautiful. Just like I know that those plus sized models are beautiful. The only reason I hate my weight, is because I know for my height it is unhealthy. Not because of the way it makes me look or feel.
In the end, the only thing that should matter is health. If you're to skinny, that's not healthy, and it's ugly. Same thing with being to heavy. If it's to the point that it's negatively impacting your life and your health, there is nothing beautiful about that.
I know someone is probably going to get angry at me for saying this, but to be honest, when I look at women with no curves - or to many - I feel disgusted. These are woman who should be proud of themselves and take care of their bodies. Anything less says to me than they just have no self respect, and that's not something that is attractive - on any body type.
Heavy or fat, thin or skinny, it really all just comes down to how it is you feel about yourself, and how you let other people's opinions affect your view on yourself.
Reply
Saturday 03 April
By dani
I'm fairly sure 120lbs and 5'6" is well within the healthy body index.
While I agree with you about how you feel about yourself being the most important, I can't agree with you about too many/little curves indicating a lack of self respect. Yes, you should want and try to keep your body healthy, but different body types shouldnt indicate some sort of conscious effort in making them that way.
I was discouraged as well though. I love the idea of "real models" in ads.
Sunday 28 March
By MissyinSoCal
I'm a sz 0-2 and seeing larger women modeling the attire that I'd potentially be shopping for is a real turn-off.. I realize that I'm thinner than the majority of people, but I'd still like to see people modeling clothes for people my size, without the bulges, muffin tops and rolls. Very displeasing to look at.
Reply
Wednesday 31 March
By Tiffany
Missy, that's understandable--but can you understand that women of other sizes might feel the same way?
Monday 05 April
By Revvie
but at the same time, you have to understand that others quite often feel the same way. We'd like to see people advertising clothes that don't look like they stand on bending sticks and have rib cages that would make a skeleton's jaw drop. Advertisements cater to the desires of people like you, who are very skinny, despite the fact that you and others like you are in the very extreme minority. Hell, I'm really skinny, having even been told be a doctor that I needed to gain weight, and even I have a size 5 pant size.
It doesn't make people feel good when they see 6 foot tall women wearing pants sizes more suitable for those who are 4 and a half feet. It doesn't make me, or many other people, I imagine, feel good to see that the standard for good looking is also the medical standard for severely unhealthy.
Monday 29 March
By SexlessInTheCity
As someone who is (and always has been), a plus-sized woman, I love seeing women in magazines who look like me. What I don't like is the use of a token plus-size model so that the magazine can pat itself on the back for being egalitarian. I wish all magazines used beautiful plus-sized women (as New York Magazine did with Christina Hendricks in its Spring Fashion issue) as models simply because they are just as gorgeous as any other model, not because it makes the magazine editors feel better.
Reply
Monday 29 March
By SexlessInTheCity
As someone who is (and always has been), a plus-sized woman, I love
seeing women in magazines who look like me. What I don't like is the
use of a token plus-size model so that the magazine can pat itself on
the back for being egalitarian. I wish all magazines used beautiful
plus-sized women (as New York Magazine did with Christina Hendricks
in its Spring Fashion issue) as models simply because they are just
as gorgeous as any other model, not because it makes the magazine
editors feel better.
Want more thoughts from the land of the single and plus-sized? http://athousandfrogs.blogspot.com
Reply
Wednesday 31 March
By Tiffany
The psychological impact of rail-thin models is based on decades of conditioning--for most women today, an entire lifetime. Measuring how women react to something out-of-the-ordinary doesn't seem a very good way to assess the likely long-term impact. Mightn't the reason women are so conscious that larger models are larger be that we're not accustomed to seeing them, and that seeing them is a signal to us that a larger woman has intentionally been chosen? Over time, if we saw a more realistic selection across the board, the impression and the impact might be quite different.
Reply
Thursday 01 April
By brent
women are there own worse enemy. They don't like themselves who else can they be. those women are good looking models. And a plus they are secure within themselves which makes it good for any guy thats with them
Reply
Thursday 01 April
By Erin
I love seeing the "average" size or "plus-size models". But I have no problem with the skinny models either. As long as they are natural that is all that matters. If you show a confindent woman of any size I think it would sell a product. Plus Crystal Renn as her "larger size" is way hotter then her "skinny size".
Reply
Thursday 01 April
By Melissa
I agree with the study. To be honest, I don't want like the "plus-size models" I'm a size 6. Bigger than the size 2 runway models, and smaller than the size 12 "plus size" models. Why not show a 6? I think that is a healthy size for most.
Reply
Thursday 01 April
By Lindsey
I find this study interesting. Although it's nice to see an increasing amount of models of more diverse shapes, I have noticed that seeing women with body types that I find more relative to mine makes me more confused about my own self-image. Granted, I am more often than not confident in my appearance, and though I am larger than the more typical short and slim girls that grace my college campus, I still find myself to be a beautiful person. Despite this, though, when I see advertising campaigns stating that "big is beautiful," and that I should "embrace my curves" I still don't feel empowered. As a matter of fact, I feel like these campaigns to embrace one's own appearance is almost a marketing ploy that is significantly based more on shock factor than on a genuine interest in making women feel as though they have more in common with the models that grace their favorite magazine's pages, as slim models who have tended to be the norm (who could have a figure that is completely natural to them–this is fine!). I consider myself "average" in body type—softer lines and extra, but subtle, bits of weight exist on my frame here and there—but seeing the stigmatized title of "plus-size" next to women who I find are also average in frame creates a sort of discord between my opinion and what I perceive as everyone else's opinion. It shouldn't matter, but for the most part, I feel as though magazines despite with what seem to be, more often than not, earnest attempts to broaden the definition of beauty, need to be a bit more prudent and cognizant of what message they are sending to the masses.
Reply