About Losing Weight on Body Satisfaction, Mood and Food Intake

Bourn, Pichard, Hutchinson, and Wilson in the year 2015 wrote “Watching reality weight-loss TV. T effects on body satisfaction, mood, and snack food consumption.” This article is a theoretical essay that was projected to help explain, to predict, and to help better understand phenomena that are already existing to extend the knowledge of the already standing analytical framework. This of influence a weight loss reality TV show does to one’s body satisfaction, their mood and their food consumption that any one individual may experience.

This study focused on 99 young Australian women and first measures their state of body satisfaction and their mood. Then from there, the second step was to randomly assign to one of the two studies. One was a home renovation program where they were provided with food or a weight loss program and the other where a weight loss show wasn’t being viewed. Lastly, the post measures focused on an individual’s state, mood, and food restraints and snack consumption, and their body satisfaction.

The results from this study noted that the women in the study that were larger experienced less body satisfaction with themselves and were had more negative moods in response to the weight loss program. A greater percentage of women with higher dietary restraint are food while watching the weight loss program and a larger percentage of women with lower dietary restraints are in the controlled condition as well. The overall finding from this theoretical study focused on what could be the negative impact that weight-focused reality television could have on one’s mood, food consumptions, and their overall body satisfaction.

Get quality help now

writer-Charlotte

Verified

Proficient in: Psychology

4.7 (348)

“ Amazing as always, gave her a week to finish a big assignment and came through way ahead of time. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

This article is primarily scholarly in content. The article is very credible and is associated with two different Universities in Australia. The two universities are Flinders which supports three authors and the University of South Australia that supports one author. This article is also associated with the Cancer Council in South Australia as well with a connection to one author. Although this study has a relatively great size for the two studies to be completed having 99 young Australian women, I also agree with the quality that was stated and reviewed in the literature review. This study is extending its arguments on already existing statements and already existing studies that have been completed in that research is indicating that tv viewing is a contributing factor to the rise in obesity.

With that, there are no new unusual perspectives that were stated or aroused in this article/study. It is also clear that this study is extending on already grounded previous research because other authors and studies are mentioned throughout the six-page study. I would agree that this study delivers on the promise of its title as well as its abstract. The hypothesis is supported by evidence. ANOVAS were conducted in this study to compare the effects of the condition on one’s body satisfaction and their mood. The article is very understandable because the writing is clear and concise, and it is also organized neatly. The labeling of the article is very helpful and the few illustrations do add to the article in a positive way.

In the year 2016 Levine and Kearney wrote the article “Does Reality TV Induct Real Effects” that was meant to expand off of the preexisting critique, “Media Influences on Social Outcomes: The Impact of MTV’s 16 and Pregnant on Teen Childbearing” written by Jaeger, Joyce, and Kaestner in 2015. This article was intended to reassessment the substance of the already existing critiques to expand on the claim that the parallel trends assumptions are necessary to attribute causes another find which is not satisfied.

There was three main response to the study that all concluded in this study not posing a serious threat to the interpretation of the already existing study that was completed in 2015. The proposed and resulted in maintaining the position that was already stated in that reality tv shows like MTV’s 16 and Pregnant does contribute to teen birth rates in America.

Overall this article is one that I will not want to use in my research paper. Although the language used was written geared toward my ideal audience and I was able to comprehend the terminology, it was a “pointless” article to use. I say that it was pointless because this study was meant to support the already existing study and to keep it updated. If I want to use a study pertaining to this topic, in which I do, I will need to look into the original study and expand off of that initial article. This study did not state their demographics, methods, or results. The only important conclusions that were mentioned is that they still support the already existing hypothesis that parallel trends is necessary to cause when looking at MTV’s 16 and Pregnant.

This article was not easy to understand. It was not organized and not written clearly. At times, I didn’t know what print I was supposed to be reading and what was supposed to be read next. I also didn’t like how there were two different parts to this article. This article would have been more beneficial to have had graphics and supporting graphics to add to the article in a positive way. The language was clear, and I was able to easily comprehend the entire context without being confused. This study does deliver on its title and abstract, however, it needed to be supported with a lot more detail. I should have to go back to the original study to look up demographics and numbers.

This to me is not nearly as credible as the other two articles that I read and critiqued. The authors kept giving credit back to the original authors so to me, these authors don’t need to be credited for anything since they didn’t add or expand on the knowledge that was already stated. Overall the most valuable contribution to this article was supporting the already existing knowledge so the results and conclusions are still supported and valid. Wilson, Robinson, and Callister wrote “Surviving Survivor: A Content Analysis of Antisocial Behavior and Its Context in a Popular Reality Television Show” in 2012. This study was theoretical because it was intended to expand on an already existing phenomenon. This study examined seven seasons of the reality television shows, Survivor, to determine frequency, types, and context of antisocial behavior that was seen in the reality tv series. This study also examined the possible effects of what the tv show has on the viewers using two theories. The two theories that were used were cultivation theory and social learning theory.

This study did expand on an already existing study on antisocial behavior that was completed way back in 1997. This study was completed nearly 15 years later and since then media has expanded exponentially since then, so a study was due. Although Survivor did not exist during this previous study that was mentioned before, it still adds to the same two theories. Of the three articles that I reviewed; the methodology was sound, and it was represented in the article. It was supported by sample, coding, and measures. The measures were also divided into five categories that were strongly supported. Not only was the methodology sound, but the results section of the article was also supported and sound. This was a quantitive research so many analyses were evaluated such as chi-square test.

This study focused on over 4,000 antisocial acts that were completed in throughout the seven series. There were limitations noted in this article. One of the limitations noted was the gap between season 2 and Season 7 do not allow for a complete picture of the trajectory of antisocial behavior in the television show. This study also can’t directly predict the effect of what reality TV shows will have on the longtime viewers. They noted this because of research deals with the content of the show and not the responses of viewers. This article was easy to understand, and it was written very clearly. The language used was geared nicely towards its audience. Not only was the language easy to follow the overall study was organized nicely and that too was easy to follow.