Introducing an instrument to measure body and fitness-related self-conscious emotions: The BSE-FIT

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.10.003Get rights and content

Highlights

  • A measure that collectively assesses fitness shame, guilt, and pride was developed.

  • A 4-factor structure representing shame, guilt, authentic and hubristic pride was supported.

  • Strong evidence for content, concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity was presented.

  • The development and validation of the BSE-FIT may help advance body image and physical activity research.

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of this study was to develop a new self-report instrument to assess experiences of shame, guilt, authentic pride, and hubristic pride in a fitness context.

Design and method

In Study 1, 41 potential items were developed and assessed for item quality and comprehension. In Study 2, a panel of experts (N = 8; M = 10.55, SD = 6.49 years of experience) assessed the scale and items for validity evidence based on content. Participants in Study 3 (N = 435) completed the Body-related Self-Conscious Emotions Fitness instrument (BSE-FIT) and other established self-report measures of body image, personality, emotion, and behavior. A subset of participants (n = 38; 38% male) in Study 3 completed a 2-week follow-up.

Results

The BSE-FIT subscale scores demonstrated evidence for internal consistency, temporal stability over a 2-week period, concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity. A 4-factor conceptualization of the instrument was supported.

Conclusions

Overall, the final 16-item BSE-FIT instrument shows promise as a new instrument for assessing shame, guilt, and authentic and hubristic facets of pride in fitness contexts.

Section snippets

Conceptualization of shame, guilt, and pride

Shame implies the perceived or feared loss of social status and a failure to meet internalized standards, with a focus on deeply rooted global causes about the self (e.g., “I am an unfit person”; Lewis, 1971, Tracy and Robins, 2004). The phenomenological experiences that accompany shame include a sense of worthlessness, humility, and shrinking, and the desire to hide, or disappear (Tangney, Miller, Flicker, & Barlow, 1996). Shame experiences are consistently linked to a host of maladaptive

Extant body-related shame, guilt, and pride measures

Few published instruments have been developed to assess body-related self-conscious emotions. Such instruments include: (a) the Body and Appearance Self-Conscious Emotions Scale (BASES; Castonguay, Sabiston, Crocker, & Mack, 2014); (b) the Weight and Body-Related Shame and Guilt Scale (WEB-SG; Conradt et al., 2007); (c) the Body Image Guilt and Shame Scale (BIGGS; Thompson et al., 2003); (d) the Objectified Body Consciousness Scale (McKinley & Hyde, 1996); (e) the Shame and Guilt Eating Scale

Research overview

The overall purpose of this series of studies was to develop and evaluate select psychometric properties of a trait self-report instrument designed to assess fitness-related self-conscious emotions (the Body-related Self-Conscious Emotions Fitness instrument; BSE-FIT) assessing shame, guilt, and authentic and hubristic facets of pride. Three studies were conducted to develop items and to provide validity evidence based on content, internal structure, test-criterion relationships (concurrent),

Study 1: Generation of initial questionnaire items

The specific aim of Study 1 was to develop and refine the items comprising the BSE-FIT. Following item generation, preliminary refinement of the BSE-FIT items was done using quantitative and qualitative responses on item quality and content from colleagues and a sample of older adolescents and adults.

Study 2: Content validity

The objective of Study 2 was to examine item content relevance and representation of the initial pool of BSE-FIT items. Content domain experts completed an item matching task, and content validity index and representativeness of the construct scales. Results from this study provide validity evidence based on content of the BSE-FIT instrument.

Study 3: Item quality and validation evidence

The objectives of the third study were to: (a) test the BSE-FIT with adolescents and adults to examine endorsement frequency, item means, variability, scale distributions, inter-item and item-total correlations, (b) investigate evidence of the internal structure of the BSE-FIT, and (c) investigate evidence of the internal consistency and concurrent, convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity of the BSE-FIT subscale scores.

General discussion

The overall aim of the current study was to develop a new self-report instrument to assess fitness-related experiences of shame, guilt, authentic pride, and hubristic pride. The BSE-FIT subscale scores demonstrated evidence of reliability and relations with other variables and internal structure sources of validity in a sample of older adolescents and adults. Addressing some calls for more self-conscious emotion research in specific domains of the self (Tangney & Tracy, 2012) and a focus on

Conclusion

In summary, the BSE-FIT is the first published instrument to effectively capture fitness aspects of shame, guilt, and the positive emotional experiences of authentic and hubristic pride. The BSE-FIT showed evidence of reliability, concurrent and convergent validity evidence, and the shame, guilt, and both pride subscales displayed discriminant validity correlational patterns to other respective subscales. Nonetheless, it is important to remember that validation is an on-going process (Zhu, 2012

Acknowledgment

Castonguay was supported by SSHRC doctoral and CIHR Postdoctoral Fellowships during the preparation of this manuscript. Sabiston holds a Canada Research Chair in Physical Activity and Mental Health.

References (79)

  • E.M. Andersen et al.

    Screening for depression in well older adults: evaluation of a short form of the ces-d (center for epidemiological studies depression scale)

    American Journal of Preventive Medicine

    (1994)
  • B. Andrews et al.

    Predicting depressive symptoms with a new measure of shame: the experience of shame scale

    British Journal of Clinical Psychology

    (2002)
  • P.M. Bentler et al.

    Eqs for windows: User's guide

    (1995)
  • R.M. Calogero et al.

    Body guilt: preliminary evidence for a further subjective experience of self-objectification

    Psychology of Women Quarterly

    (2011)
  • T.F. Cash et al.

    Body image: A handbook of science, practice, and prevention

    (2011)
  • A.L. Castonguay et al.

    Body-related self-conscious emotions relate to physical activity motivation and behavior in men

    American Journal of Men's Health

    (2015)
  • F.F. Chen et al.

    Measurement invariance and the role of body consciousness in depressive symptoms

    Psychology of Women Quarterly

    (2010)
  • D.V. Cicchetti et al.

    Developing criteria for establishing interrater reliability of specific items: application to assessment of adaptive behavior

    American Journal of Mental Deficiency

    (1981)
  • T.R. Cohen et al.

    Introducing the GASP scale: a new measure of guilt and shame proneness

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2011)
  • M. Conradt et al.

    Development of the weight- and body-related shame and guilt scale (WEB-SG) in a nonclinical sample of obese individuals

    Journal of Personality Assessment

    (2007)
  • L. Cronbach

    Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests

    Psychometrika

    (1951)
  • J. Dawes

    Do data characteristics change according to the number of scale points used? An experiment using 5-point, 7-point and 10-point scales

    International Journal of Market Research

    (2008)
  • R.L. Dearing et al.

    Shame in the therapy hour

    (2011)
  • E. Diener et al.

    Happiness is the frequency, not the intensity, of positive versus negative affect

  • J.G.H. Dunn et al.

    Assessing item content-relevance in sport psychology scale-construction research: Issues and recommendations

    Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science

    (1999)
  • K.W. Fischer et al.

    Self-conscious emotions and the affect revolution: framework and overview

  • F.J. Fowler
    (1995)
  • K.R. Fox

    Advances in the measurement of the physical self

  • E.S. Frank

    Shame and guilt in eating disorders (doctoral dissertation, harvard graduate school of education, 1990)

    Dissertation Abstracts International

    (1990)
  • B.L. Fredrickson et al.

    Objectification theory: toward understanding women's lived experiences and mental health risks

    Psychology of Women Quarterly

    (1997)
  • H. Frith et al.

    Dressing the body: the role of clothing in sustaining body pride and managing body distress

    Qualitative Research in Psychology

    (2008)
  • F. Gino et al.

    Dishonesty in the name of equity

    Psychological Science

    (2009)
  • R.K. Hambleton

    Validating the test scores

  • L. Hu et al.

    Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventianal criteria versus new alternatives

    Structural Equation Modeling

    (1999)
  • R. Jankauskiene et al.

    Disordered eating attitudes and body shame among athletes, exercisers and sedentary female college students

    Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness

    (2012)
  • O.P. John et al.

    The big five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives

    (1999)
  • S. Kim et al.

    Shame, guilt, and depressive symptoms: a meta-analytic review

    Psychological Bulletin

    (2011)
  • J.A. Krosnick et al.

    Question and questionnaire design

  • M. Lewis

    Shame and guilt in neurosis

    (1971)
  • Cited by (37)

    • The Body and Appearance Self-Conscious Emotions Scale (BASES): A comprehensive examination of its factorial validity, with recommendations for researchers

      2022, Body Image
      Citation Excerpt :

      These limitations notwithstanding and, while acknowledging that research on body and appearance-related self-conscious emotions has expanded rapidly, we suggest that it may be useful to pause and carefully consider both how such self-conscious emotions should be conceptualised and what the BASES is actually measuring. Further, we suggest that the issues raised here may also affect other similar instruments, such as the Body-Related Self-Conscious Emotions Fitness instrument (BSE-FIT; Castonguay et al., 2016). In all such cases, we suggest that it remains an open question whether body and appearance-related self-conscious emotions can really be decomposed into a discrete set of four emotions, and whether existing instruments are able to adequately assess those emotions.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text