The Perceived Match Between Observed and Own Bodies, but Not Its Accuracy, Is Influenced by Movement Dynamics and Clothing Cues

Abstract

Own-perceived body matching – the ability to match one’s own body with an observed body – is a difficult task for both general and clinical populations. Thus far, however, own-perceived body matching has been investigated in situations that are incongruent with how we are used to experience and perceive our body in daily life. In the current study, we aimed to examine own-perceived body matching in a context that more closely resembles real life. More specifically, we investigated the effects of body movement dynamics and clothing cues on own-perceived body matching. We asked participants to match their own body with an externally perceived body that was a 3D-generated avatar based on participants’ real bodies, fitted with a computer-generated dress. This perceived body was (1) either static (non-walking avatar) or dynamic (walking avatar), (2) either bigger, smaller, or the same size as participants’ own body size, and (3) fitted with a dress with a size either bigger, smaller, or the same as participants’ own dress size. Our results suggest that movement dynamics cues did not improve the accuracy of own-perceived body matching, but that confidence about dress fit was higher for dynamic avatars, and that the difference between dynamic and static avatars was dependent on participants’ self-esteem. Furthermore, when participants were asked to rate the observed body in reference to how they wanted to represent themselves to others, dynamic avatars were rated lower than static avatars for the biggest-sized bodies only, possibly reflecting the influence of movement cues on amplifying socio-cultural stereotypes. Finally, while smaller body/dress sizes were systematically rated higher than bigger body/dress sizes for several self-report items, the interplay between body and dress size played an important role in participants’ self-report as well. Thus, while our research suggests that movement and garment dynamics, allowing for realistic, concrete situations that are reminiscent of daily life, influence own-body perception, these cues did not lead to an improvement in accuracy. These findings provide important insights for research exploring (own-) body perception and bodily self-awareness, with practical (e.g., development of online avatars) and clinical (e.g., anorexia nervosa and body dysmorphic disorder) implications.

Exploring multisensory integration of non-naturalistic sounds on body perception in young females with eating disorders symptomatology: a study protocol

“…The MAIA have shown adequate internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha 0.64 to 0.83 for all subscales) X Auditory trials Presented in four conditions: an anchor task (20 trials); a practice task (3 trials); an experimental block (30 trials) and a questionnaire block (3 trials) X X Estimation of body position (finger/waist) To assess estimation of location or position of fingertip/knuckle (allowing to calculate the estimated finger length can be calculated) and waist width after each auditory experimental trial X Confidence task It has been found that the reliability of perception might be linked to subjective rather than objective accuracy [ 41 ]. For example, previous studies using body illusions report that confidence was not accompanied by increases in objective accuracy (i.e., [ 42 , 43 ]). Therefore, to assess the reliability of their estimations, after each auditory experimental trial, the feeling of confidence with the estimation of body part position will be explicitly assessed by asking the participants: “From one to seven, how confident are you of your estimation?” (7-point Likert scale) X X Body feelings questionnaire (finger/waist) [ 25 ] To assess subjective feelings about their finger/waist after the trials (susceptibility to the illusion).…”

Effects of pitch and musical sounds on body-representations when moving with sound

“…1 in the survey included a question about confidence reaching the requested position (i.e., position 1 or 2), "How confident were you with this sound that your arm was in the <position>? ", which was based on previous research assessing task confidence [57][58][59] . Participants answered using a 7-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1: "not confident at all" to 7: "completely confident".…”

Altering body-representation through non-naturalistic sounds: study protocol for an experimental study in a subclinical eating disorders sample

“…It has been found that the reliability of perception might be linked to subjective rather than objective accuracy [40]. For example, previous studies using BIs report that con dence was not accompanied by increases in objective accuracy (i.e., [41,42]). Therefore, to assess the reliability of their estimations, after each auditory experimental trial, the feeling of con dence with the estimation of body part position will be explicitly assessed by asking the participants: "From one to seven, how con dent are you of your estimation?"…”