Black Beauty: Womanist Consciousness as a Protective Factor in Black Women’s Body Image Satisfaction

Abstract

Black American women are exposed to mainstream beauty standards, which may have implications for body image satisfaction. Given that beauty standards are often based on idealized depictions of White women’s physical features, scholars have called for body image research that extends beyond body type/weight (e.g., skin tone/hair) to better examine the experiences of Black women. In examining body image satisfaction and protective factors (e.g., ethnic identity), empirical research has yet to attend to these experiences at the intersection of race/ethnicity and gender. An online survey was used to examine whether womanist consciousness (WC) was a protective factor for Black American women (N = 211). Findings indicated that after controlling for ethnic identity, higher womanist consciousness significantly predicted higher body satisfaction with historically racially defined features (e.g., skin tone/hair) and lower self-ideal discrepancy. Darker skin tone was linked to higher body importance and higher ethnic identity level. Last, increased frequency of wearing hair weaves was associated with lower body satisfaction while more frequently wearing Afrocentric hair styles/textures was associated with higher body satisfaction.

Keywords

body image race/ethnicity intersectionality Black women

Black and African American¹ women are exposed to mainstream beauty standards, which are communicated through various mediums, such as family, peers, intimate relationships, and media outlets (Capodilupo, 2014; Landor et al., 2013). Some scholars have called for more inclusive beauty and body image research, which has primarily focused on White women with less attention to women of color, particularly Black women (Awad et al., 2014). As body image research has grown to include racial and ethnic minorities, several studies have reported that Black and African American women are less concerned about body image and have greater tolerance for diverse body types and shapes than their White counterparts (Chithambo & Huey, 2013; Jefferson & Stake, 2009; Plybon et al., 2006; Poran, 2002). While thinness is valued as a component of mainstream American beauty standards, weight is only one aspect of body image. Due to the historical context of slavery, racism, and colorism in the United States, scholars have continuously called for the inclusion of measures of beauty that extend beyond body type and shape when considering body image within the Black community (e.g., skin color, hair, and facial features) (Awad et al., 2014; Capodilupo & Kim, 2014; Jefferson & Stake, 2009).

The term colorism has been defined by race scholars as the allocation of privilege and disadvantage based on one’s skin tone, where factors such as hair texture, eye color, facial features, education, and income also shape perceptions of who is considered dark or light skinned (Burton et al., 2010; Maxwell et al., 2015). The history of colorism is important in body image research with Black women as studies analyzing attractiveness appraisals have demonstrated that African American participants perceived lighter skinned women as more attractive than darker skinned women (Hill, 2002; Maxwell et al., 2015). Qualitative research has also highlighted these historically relevant features as important for understanding Black women’s body image concerns with findings suggesting that Eurocentric features, such as light skin and long hair, have been viewed as beautiful and/or desirable for Black and African American women (Awad et al., 2014; Bellinger, 2007; Capodilupo & Kim, 2014; Robinson-Moore, 2008; Thomas et al., 2011; Wilder, 2010). This research highlights the importance of including hair and skin color when measuring Black women’s body image satisfaction.

Empirical research, however, has been limited and inconsistent in findings regarding Black women’s body image satisfaction when culturally relevant aspects of appearance are considered. Research has indicated little skin color dissatisfaction among African American women with preferences for lighter skin when dissatisfaction is present (Bond & Cash, 1992; Jefferson & Stake, 2009). Inconsistency across previous findings suggest the need for further investigation of Black women’s body image satisfaction with particular attention to variables that may help explain the variance in their experiences.

Several variables have been examined as protective factors in the face of mainstream American beauty standards including ethnic and racial identities. While often used interchangeably, the terms ethnic identity and racial identity are distinguished by ethnic identity’s emphasis on history, tradition, and culture while racial identity is considered to develop as a reaction to racial oppression (Cokley, 2007). Higher ethnic identity has been linked to lower body dissatisfaction, less internalization of mainstream thinness ideals, and lower prevalence of eating disorders in samples of African American women (Rakhkovskaya & Warren, 2014; Rogers Wood & Petrie, 2010; Zhang et al., 2009). Like much of the body image literature, this research has been limited by its focus on weight-related body concerns. Research extending beyond body type/shape has examined the role of racial identity (understanding, meaning, and salience of identification with one’s racial group) and African consciousness (commitment to African-centered values and cultural practice; Chambers et al., 1994; Coard et al., 2001; Falconer & Neville, 2000: Hesse-Biber et al., 2010). The findings linked higher levels of Black racial identity and African consciousness with positive body image and/or more favorable attitudes toward Afrocentric physical attributes among Black and African American women. This literature has been limited by a focus entirely on ethnic, racial, or cultural affiliation as protective, and lack thereof as a risk factor (Maxwell et al., 2015). Empirical research has yet to attend to Black women’s body image at the intersection of gender, race, and/or ethnicity.

Much of the research on Black Americans has neglected the implications of heterogeneity among US Blacks (Griffith et al., 2011). While the US Census (U.S. Census Bureau, 2021) treats “Black or African American” as a single racial category, scholars have differentiated Black Americans into meaningful sub-groups (African American, Caribbean Black, Honduran, etc.) consisting of people with similar cultural and physical traits including language, nativity, history, values, and tradition (Griffith et al., 2011; Williams et al., 2007). One study examining body dissatisfaction and self-esteem among Black women of different ethnic backgrounds found Afro-Caribbean women had higher body satisfaction than African American women (Mucherah & Frazier, 2013).

Research examining Black women’s body image requires a nuanced, culturally sensitive approach to fully examine and understand their unique experiences. Intersectionality theory offers such a framework toward this understanding. The origins of intersectionality theory are grounded in Black feminism, which is characterized by the core principle that interlocking and simultaneous oppressions on the bases of race, class, and gender greatly impact the lived experiences of Black women (Collins, 2000; Crenshaw, 1989; Thomas, 2004; Watson et al., 2019). Crenshaw (1989) introduced the concept of intersectionality in her critique of antidiscrimination laws where she highlights the multiplicative nature of racism and sexism, viewing them as intertwined and inextricably linked as opposed to occurring independently of each other. As Cole (2009) points out, psychologists are increasingly concerned with how various cultural factors such as race, ethnicity, gender, and social class, impact outcomes such as health and well-being, yet little work has considered how these aspects are jointly associated with outcomes. These limitations are evident in literature which has focused solely on comparative approaches (e.g., Black women to White women) with little attention to culturally relevant aspects of Black women’s body image (Chithambo & Huey, 2013; Plybon et al., 2006; Poran, 2002). The literature has also been limited by focusing on racial identity, ethnic identity, or African consciousness as protective in Black women’s body image satisfaction, rather than considering the simultaneous role of gender identity (Chambers et al., 1994; Coard et al., 2001; Falconer & Neville, 2000: Hesse-Biber et al., 2010).

Little work has taken an intersectional approach to researching the experiences of Black women. In a phenomenological study examining the intersection of gender and racial identity (gendered racial identity) among African American women, the main theme of participant responses revealed that gendered racial identity had greater salience for the participants as compared to the separate constructs of racial or gender identity (Thomas et al., 2011). Another study utilizing an intersectional approach to examining African American women’s perceptions of racism found that womanist consciousness (WC), but not generalized feminism, was associated with African American women’s identification of a racist event and acknowledgment of its negative impact (King, 2003). In this study, King (2003) defined WC as gender consciousness among women of color, for whom the intersection of race and gender is used as the basis for interpreting experiences. These studies provide support for the use of an intersectional framework and methodology in the studies pertaining to Black women.

A lack of established guidelines for empirically addressing research questions informed by an intersectional framework has resulted in gaps in the literature on Black women’s body image, which has been limited in the incorporation of this concept into empirical work (Cole, 2009; Simien & Clawson, 2004). Cole (2009) provides guidance for psychologists conceptualizing research from an intersectional lens. In these guidelines she encourages psychologists to (a) focus on neglected groups, (b) use/develop measures from the perspective of the neglected group, (c) attend to social and historical contexts of inequality for conceptualizing and understanding differences, and (d) consider diverse groups connected by common relationships to social and institutional power with sensitivity to nuanced variations across groups.

In line with Cole’s (2009) recommendations the current study used an intersectional theoretical framework by first centralizing the Black female experience. The study does this by focusing exclusively on Black American women in an effort to attend to a historically neglected group and prevent comparative analyses with other groups that negate intersectional aspects of Black women’s identity. Second, the study uses a design that recognizes the nuanced experiences of Black American women who may be differentially impacted by Eurocentric beauty standards based on their own consciousness of their intersectional identity. The current study builds on previous research in two ways. First, it adds to a limited body of work, which has examined satisfaction with historically relevant features. Second, it builds on research examining the protective quality of ethnic identity, racial identity, and African consciousness in Black women’s body image satisfaction, but goes a step further by exploring the potential unique protective capability of WC, an integrated sense of gendered, ethnic, and racial identities. To the investigator’s knowledge it is the first study to examine the relationship between WC and body image satisfaction among Black women. The following hypotheses were tested:

Hypothesis 1

Higher levels of WC will predict higher body satisfaction above and beyond ethnic identity level as a predictor.

Hypothesis 2

Higher levels of WC will predict lower body importance above and beyond ethnic identity level as a predictor.

Hypothesis 3

Higher levels of WC will predict lower discrepancy between ideal versus actual body above and beyond ethnic identity level as a predictor.

Hypothesis 4

Higher levels of WC will predict lower weighted body discrepancy (WBD) above and beyond ethnic identity level as a predictor.

Method

Participants

Participants (N = 401) were recruited from a Northeastern minority serving institution (MSI) in the United States and social media (Facebook and Instagram). Only US.-born women, 18–40 years of age, who racially self-identified as Black, were eligible to participate in the study. Recruitment materials and study consent specifically outlined inclusion eligibility; however, final inclusion eligibility was determined from the demographic data questionnaire. About 75% of those recruited (N = 299) were actually eligible to participate in the study. Participants who were not in the target age group (N = 7, 2%) as well as those who started the survey but did not complete at least 80% of the measures and/or took longer than 2 hours to complete the survey (N = 81, 20%) were excluded from hypothesis testing analyses. Two hours was selected as a cut off because 95% of eligible study participants completed the survey in 25–71 minutes with individuals completing the survey in 47.8 minutes on average.

Demographic variables for eligible but excluded Black American women (N = 88) were examined to explore how they compared to women in the final sample (N = 211). A fixed alpha level of .05 was used for all analyses. Continuous variables (income and family size) that met assumptions of multivariate normality and equal variance were examined for group differences via t-tests. Because age was not normally distributed, group differences were examined via a Mann–Whitney U test. Assumptions of discrete observation, minimum cell count, and fundamental distribution were met, and categorical variables were examined for group differences via chi-square analyses. The following categorical variables were examined: first generation immigrant status, current college enrollment, first generation college student status, ethnic identity, dependent status, sexual orientation, relationship status, and socioeconomic status. Women who were excluded were less likely to be college students (X² [1, N = 295] = 5.60, p = .02), Cramer’s V = .14. They were less likely to have been first generation college students (X² [2, N = 292] = 9.00, p = .01), Cramer’s V = .18. Last, they were more likely to have dependents other than a spouse (X² [1, N = 297] = 6.45, p = .01), Cramer’s V = .15. No other significant differences were found between excluded versus final participants.

The final sample consisted of N = 211 Black American women. The mean age of participants was 22.9 years old (SD = 4.9; range 18–40). Seventy five percent (159) of participants identified racially as African American, thirty-seven (18%) identified as African, other ethnicity, 13 (6%) identified as Multiethnic, and 2 (1%) identified as other. Other ethnicity was clarified with qualitative descriptors, such as West Indian, Dominican etc. Nearly half (N = 108, 48%) reported having attended a historically Black college/university (HBCU), 55 (26%) attended predominantly White institutions (PWI), fourteen (7%) attended a MSI, and 39 (19%) answered not applicable to this question.

Procedure

The university’s institutional review board where the study took place approved the study methodology and recruitment materials. Recruitment was conducted by a team of four Black American women via convenience sampling on campus, email blasts to students, the surrounding community, Facebook, and Instagram. Recruitment flyers and handouts for the study contained instructions for accessing the online study and electronic flyers included a direct web link to the study consent page. Participants who elected to proceed with the study acknowledged that they were at least 18 years of age, agreed to participate, and understood that participation was confidential and voluntary. Participants were told that the online study was about how Black American women's personal attitudes and health behaviors shape product consumption and decisions. The cover story was used to disguise the study in an effort to reduce social desirability of participant responses. Participants completed study questionnaires and were then asked to view product advertisements (five each) marketed toward Black women and rate the likelihood that they would buy and use the products in keeping with the study’s disguise. Measures were presented in the same order for all participants. Participants were compensated for their participation with entry into a US$50 Visa Card raffle and their choice of the following: (a) receiving extra credit from a participating professor or (b) receiving a US$10 Bath and Body Works E-Gift Card. Nearly half of the sample reported hearing about the survey from a professor (N = 103, 49%), 50 (24%) from other (email, Facebook, and Instagram), 33 (16%) reported from a friend, 10 (5%) from a campus event, 9 (4%) from campus hallway, and 5 (2%) from a community event. At the end of the survey, participants were debriefed online in which a description of the actual purpose and rationale of the study was provided, and participants were asked to keep the actual purpose confidential from other potential participants to preserve the viability of future data. During this debriefing, participants were invited to provide feedback on the questions and their experience completing the survey.

Measures

Body Image

The Body Image Ideals Questionnaire (BIQ; Cash & Szymanski, 1995) was administered to assess body image ideals. The BIQ is a measure of physical characteristics, including skin color, hair, face, body proportions, weight, etc. Consistent with Jefferson and Stake (2009), the current study used specific facial feature items to supplement the BIQ scale to assess attitudes about racially defined appearance. The facial features items included four specific items: eyes, nose, lips, and face shape. In the current study the hair item was modified to include length in addition to hair texture and thickness bringing the number of specific features assessed to 15 rather than the 13 features used by Jefferson and Stake (2009). The BIQ measures self versus ideal body discrepancies (SIBD) as well as the importance placed on these features. Each specific body feature is assessed using a five-point Likert scale to assess the extent to which each listed feature matches the participants’ ideal: 0 = exactly as I am, 1 = almost as I am, 2 = somewhat as I am, 3 = fairly unlike me, and 4 = very unlike me. The degree of importance placed on each ideal for self-attractiveness is also assessed via five-point Likert scale ranging from 0 = not important to 4 = very important. Participants who reported a discrepancy for skin color were prompted to indicate whether they desire to be lighter or darker. Three composite scores are derived from the BIQ. The SIBD score is the mean of the rated SIBD, the importance score is the mean of the rated importance scores, and the WBD score is the mean of the cross-products of the ideal discrepancy and importance scores. Higher discrepancy scores indicate more discrepancy between actual versus ideal body. Higher body importance scores indicate greater emphasis placed on body features for attractiveness.

Filler questions were included to disguise the purpose of the supplemental items. For example, questions about hair dryness and moisture retention efforts were incorporated along with texture and thickness. Participants were also asked about using chemical straighteners. If they endorsed this question, they were instructed to answer the BIQ hair questions regarding texture, thickness, and length of both their natural hair and chemically straightened hair. The measure was scored using participant BIQ responses pertaining to their natural hair. Using WBD scores from a sample of African American and European American Women, Jefferson and Stake (2009) determined the presence of four factors, followed by the presence of three (weight-related features, specific appearance features, and functional body characteristics) after dropping height due to low loading on all factors. The current study found the presence of four factors from the WBD scores of study participants based on a four factor solution of principal component analysis using the parallel analysis criterion (Watkins, 2018). The items were meaningfully categorized into the following factors: functional body type, culturally relevant facial features, hair type, and body proportions.

Reliability and validity of the scale scores have been established among a sample of African American and European American women. Cronbach’s alphas of the scores have been reported to be .76, .89, and .73 for the ideal discrepancy, importance, and weighted discrepancy scores, respectively (Jefferson & Stake, 2009). In line with previous research, Cronbach’s alphas for the BIQ scores were found to be .74, .85, and .73 for the ideal discrepancy, importance, and weighted discrepancy scores, respectively, in the current study. The three scales of the BIQ have been reported to have strong convergent validity with measures of evaluative body image and eating disturbances (Cash & Szymanski, 1995). The scales also showed discriminant validity with little shared variance between the scales and a measure of social desirability (<6%). In the current study SIBD scales and WBD scales demonstrated convergent validity with the body satisfaction scale (r = −.63, p < .01 and r = .53, p < .01 respectively).

Hair and Skin Tone

There are no well-established measures to assess hair texture, use of hair weaves/extensions, or skin tone. Hence, the following questions were asked to obtain participants’ self-reports. Participants were asked to indicate whether they typically wear weaves, wigs, or their own hair on a 5-point Likert scale 1 = always/almost always, 2 = more than half the time, 3 = half the time, 4 = less than half the time, 5 = almost never/never. Then, participants were asked to rate their most frequently worn hair texture on a five-point scale: 1= very straight, 2 = straight, 3 = curly, 4 = very curly/coily, 5 = braided/locked/twisted. Filler questions included questions about use of skin creams, lotions, and dryness, and whether participants ever had difficulty finding appropriate foundation. Participants were then asked to provide an assessment of their skin tone using a 7- point scale ranging from 1 = my skin is very light, 2 = my skin is light, 3 = my skin is somewhat light, 4 = my skin is medium, 5 = my skin is somewhat dark, 6 = my skin is dark 7 = my skin is very dark, consistent with a self-report method used in prior research (Keith et al., 2010; Maxwell et al., 2015; Wade, 1996). Each of the three questions (frequency of hair weaves, hair texture, and skin tone) was scored as separate items.

Body Satisfaction

The Body Parts Satisfaction Scale (BPSS; Berscheid et al., 1973) is a list of 24 body features (e.g., mouth and abdomen) used to determine an individual’s body satisfaction or dissatisfaction on a 6-point scale ranging from 1 = extremely dissatisfied to 6 = extremely satisfied. Consistent with Smith et al. (1991), the current study used only nine items pertaining to the face (hair, eyes, ears, nose, mouth, chin, complexion, and overall face). The hair item was modified to ask specifically about hair length and hair texture, separately. Participants were instructed to rate their natural hair. Body satisfaction ratings were summed for a total score and could range from 9 to 54 with higher scores indicating higher body satisfaction with these nine features. The BPSS scores have demonstrated internal consistency (α = .90) among a diverse sample of Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White women (Stice et al., 2001). Cronbach’s alpha for the scale scores was .81 in the current sample. Face items have been shown to load onto one factor and the face subscore has shown convergent validity with the overall body appearance score and the subscores (Frederick et al., 2014). In the current study the modified scale showed convergent validity with body ideal discrepancy subscales. The modified scale items loaded onto two factors (hair and facial features).

Ethnic Identity

The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Scale-Revised (MEIM-R; Phinney & Ong, 2007) is a six- item measure used to assess participants’ ethnic identity but includes both racial and ethnic affiliation in the wording of the instructions (e.g., “Some examples of the names of ethnic groups are Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American”). Hence the wording allows participants to respond based on racial and/or ethnic affiliation. The MEIM-R consists of three items, which ask participants to rate themselves on their level of exploration of their culture and ethnic group, while the other three ask participants to rate their level of commitment to their ethnic identity. The scale uses a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. Scores were averaged with a range from 1 to 5 with higher scores indicating stronger exploration and commitment to group identity. The scale has shown convergent validity with the Feelings About Culture Scale-Ethnic Culture (Positive) scale (r = .63, p < .001) and discriminant validity with a social desirability scale (r = .13, p > .05) (Maffini & Wong, 2015). Cronbach alpha coefficients have ranged from .81 to .88 among diverse samples including African American women (Phinney & Ong, 2007). Cronbach’s alpha for the scale socres was .85 in the current study.

Womanist Consciousness

The Womanist Consciousness Scale (WCS; King & Fujino, 1994) is a 15-item scale used to determine the extent to which participants (a) integrate their ethnic and gender consciousness, (b) view the integration as significant to their identity and (c) wish to improve the status of women in their ethnic and racial group. Participants use a 7-point scale 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree to respond to items such as, “Black American women need to get together and work on our common problems related to race and gender oppression.” Group name can be substituted based on the target demographic group (e.g., African American, Latinx). Scores are averaged with a range from 1 to 7 with higher scores indicating higher WC. Reliability and convergent validity of the scale scores have been established among a sample of African American, Asian, and Latinx women. Cronbach’s alpha in a prior study was .80 (King, 2003). Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was .90 in the current study. The scale has been correlated with measures of ethnic and feminist consciousness (King & Fujino, 1994). Scores on this measure were positively correlated (r = .54) with ethnic identity scores as measured by the MEIM-R (Phinney & Ong, 2007).

Data Analysis Plan

Data for the variables were tested and visually inspected for outliers using box plots and histograms. Distributional properties, including Z-scores, kurtosis, and skew statistics were checked. Skewness and kurtosis values were evaluated following guidelines recommended by Kim (2013) for medium-sized samples (N = 5–300); skewness and kurtosis absolute z-values over 3.29 were considered non-normal. Transformations were used to normalize all non-normally distributed variables to improve normality, linearity, and homoscedasticity of residuals. Transformations progressed from square root to logarithmic (log10) to inverse transformations until skewness and kurtosis values fell within the normal range for each measure (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). A square root transformation was applied to self-ideal body discrepancy (SIBD). Reflection and square root transformations were applied to body satisfaction and a log transformation was applied to WBD. All analyses were run on transformed and untransformed data. Because the transformations did not impact the findings, untransformed data are reported for ease of interpretation. A fixed alpha level of .05 was used for all hypothesis testing and preliminary analyses. A statistical power analysis was performed for sample size estimation, based on a medium effect size (f2 = 0.15). With an alpha of .05 and power of .80, the minimum projected sample size needed for all analyses was approximately N = 67 indicating a sufficient final sample size (N = 211) in the current study.

Data analyses proceeded as follows: bivariate correlations were examined between all continuous study variables. ANOVAs were run to examine relationships between all main study variables and categorical demographic variables. A group of theoretically significant variables were examined via bivariate correlations (hair texture, skin tone, and use of hair weaves) and ANOVAs (ethnicity and type of college attended) as potential covariates. A variable was selected as a covariate if it was correlated with the outcome variable being tested or if it accounted for mean differences in the outcome variable being tested (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). Hypothesis testing was completed via hierarchical multiple linear regressions. The analyses examined whether WC was a significant predictor for each outcome variable: body satisfaction, body importance, SIBD, and WBD. To examine the unique predictive power of WC beyond ethnic identity level as a predictor, ethnic identity level was always entered along with any covariates prior to entering WC in the model. When present, covariates were always entered in the first step, followed by ethnic identity in the second step of the model. WC was always entered in the final step.

Results

Preliminary Analysis

Missing data were examined prior to excluding participants. Approximately 5.5% of BIQ item responses were missing from participant data, followed by 7.1% of the Body Satisfaction items, 11.8% of MEIM-R items, and 12.3% of WCS items. Missing value analyses (MVA) and Little’s MCAR test indicated that the data were missing at random (X² [5042, N = 298] = 5048.06, p = .473; McKnight et al., 2007). The BIQ scales were presented earlier in survey and had higher completion rates (80.8%, N = 324) than the WCS, which was presented later (75%, N = 301). For participants who completed at least 80% of the measures, missing values were replaced using simple mean imputation (Dziura et al., 2013).

Preliminary bivariate correlations are shown in Table 1. No issues with multicollinearity were observed between the variables. Notable findings indicated that increasing age was positively correlated with higher levels of WC (r = .20, p = .004). Increasing age was also positively correlated with higher levels of SIBD (r = .16, p = .02). Darker skin tone was positively correlated with higher body importance scores (r = .15, p = .03) and higher ethnic identity scores (r = .20, p = .01). Additionally, wearing hair weaves, wigs, and/or extensions more frequently was associated with lower body satisfaction (r = −.17, p = .01) and positively correlated with higher ethnic identity levels (r = .18, p = .01). Wearing more traditionally Afrocentric hair textures/styles was positively correlated with higher body satisfaction (r = .15, p = .03) and positively correlated with higher ethnic identity levels (r = .15, p = .03).

Table 1.

Bivariate Correlations Between Main Study Variables and Continuous Demographic Variables.

	n	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1. Age	211	22.9	4.91
2. Income	125	$48,91	$43,86	.25**
3. H. Texture	211	2.90	1.13	.18**	−.06
4. H. Weaves	211	1.93	1.00	.00	−.01	.08
5. Skin tone	210	3.92	1.30	.16*	−.23*	.06	.16*
6. Ethnic ID	210	3.76	0.75	.16*	.16	.15*	.18*	.20*
7. WC	211	5.18	0.93	.20**	.19*	.09	.05	.08	.54**
8. Body sat	211	49.07	6.94	−.03	.07	.15*	−.17*	−.03	.15*	.22**
9. Body imp	211	1.63	0.54	.03	.15	.00	.09	.15*	.16*	.16*	−.07
10. SIBD	211	1.14	0.66	.16*	.05	.08	.09	.05	−.13	−.17*	−.63**	.16**
11. WBD	177	2.35	1.49	.12	.19	−.03	.12	.10	−.01	.02	−.53**	.43**	.86**

Note. N = 211. H = Hair; WC = Womanist Consciousness; Ethnic ID = ethnic identity level; Sat = Satisfaction; Imp = Importance; SIBD = Self-Ideal Body Discrepancy; WBD = Weighted Body Discrepancy.

*p < .05, **p < .01.

A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine differences in WC between women who attended different types of colleges (PWI, HBCU, MSI, or N/A). Assumption of homogeneity of variance (HOV) was met. The results showed significant differences (F[3, 206] = 5.20, p = .002, η² $= .07$ ). Post hoc comparisons using Tukey HSD test indicated that the mean WC scores for women who attended PWIs (M = 5.58, SD = 0.87) differed significantly from women who attended HBCUs (M = 5.08, SD = 0.92, p = .01) and women marked “not applicable” to college type (M = 4.91, SD = 0.88, p = .003).

A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine differences in ethnic identity levels between women of different ethnicities (African American, African Other Ethnicity, Multiethnic, Other). Assumption of HOV was met. The results showed significant differences (F[3, 206] = 3.61, p = .01, η² =.05). Post hoc comparisons using Tukey HSD test indicated that the MEIM-R scores for women who identified as African American (M = 3.68, SD = 0.70) differed significantly from women who identified as other African ethnicities (M = 4.06, SD = 0.74, p = .04).

Hair texture and frequency of hair weaves were selected as covariates when examining body satisfaction because they were each correlated with this outcome of interest. Skin tone was selected as a covariate when examining body importance because it was correlated with this outcome of interest. Lastly age was correlated with WC and SIBD and therefore selected as a covariate when examining whether WC predicted SIBD. Neither ethnicity or college type accounted for significant mean differences among any of the outcomes of interest and therefore were not selected as covariates. No other variables were selected as covariates based on the selection criterion.

Hypothesis Testing

A hierarchical multiple linear regression was conducted to test whether higher WC would significantly predict higher body satisfaction above and beyond ethnic identity level as a predictor. Covariates (hair texture and frequency of hair weaves) were entered in step one. Ethnic identity level was entered in step two. As shown in Table 2, the model was significant at step one with 5.8% of the variance in body satisfaction being explained by the selected covariates. (F[2, 207] = 6.43, p = .002; R² = .058). When ethnic identity level was entered in step two, the variance explained increased to 8.4% and the model was significant, (F[1, 206] = 6.26, p < .001; R² change = .025, F Change = 5.65, p = .02). When WC was entered in step three, the variance explained increased to 10.7% and the model was significant, (F[1, 205] = 6.13, p < .001; R² change = .023, F Change = 5.34, p = .02).

Table 2.

Hierarchical Regression: Womanist Consciousness as a Predictor of Body Satisfaction.

Variable	B	95% CI for B		SE B	ß	R²	Δ R²
Variable	B	LL	UL	SE B	ß	R²	Δ R²
Step 1						.06	.06∗
Constant	48.59∗∗∗	45.58	51.59	1.52
Hair W	−1.31∗	−2.25	−0.39	0.47	−.19∗
Hair T	1.04∗	0.22	1.87	0.42	.17∗
Step 2						.08	.03∗
Constant	43.68∗∗∗	38.64	48.72	2.56
Hair W	−1.51∗	−2.45	−0.58	0.47	−.22∗
Hair T	1.34∗	0.09	2.60	0.42	.15∗
Ethnic ID	1.50∗	0.26	2.76	0.63	.16∗
Step 3						.11	.02∗
Constant	40.01∗∗∗	34.12	45.90	2.99
Hair W	−1.44∗	−2.37	−0.55	0.47	−.21∗
Hair T	0.88∗	0.06	1.69	0.41	.14∗
Ethnic ID	0.60	−0.86	2.06	0.74	.07
WC	0.10∗	0.01	0.17	0.04	.18∗

Note. N = 209, CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit; WC = womanist consciousness; Hair W = frequency of hair weaves; Hair T = hair texture; Ethnic ID = ethnic identity level. Hair weaves and hair texture entered as covariates.

∗p < .05 ∗∗∗p < .001.

A hierarchical multiple linear regression was conducted to test whether higher WC would significantly predict lower body importance above and beyond ethnic identity level as a predictor. Skin tone (covariate) was entered at step one. Ethnic identity level was entered in step two. Table 3 illustrates that the model was significant at step one with 2.4% of the variance in body importance being explained by skin tone (F[1, 205] = 5.07, p = .03; R² = .024). When ethnic identity level was entered in step two, the variance explained increased to 3.9% but the change in the model was not significant, (F[1, 204] = 4.14, p = .02; R² change = .015, F Change = 3.16, p = .08). When WC was entered in step three, the variance explained increased to 4.7%. The overall model remained significant but the change in the model was not significant, (F[1, 203] = 3.35, p = .02; R² change = .047, F Change = 1.73, p = .19).

Table 3.

Hierarchical Regression: Womanist Consciousness as a Predictor of Body Importance.

Variable	B	95% CI for B		SE B	ß	R ²	Δ R²
Variable	B	LL	UL	SE B	ß	R ²	Δ R²
Step 1						.02	.02∗
Constant	1.37∗∗∗	1.17	1.60	0.12
Skin tone	0.07∗	0.01	0.12	0.03	.16∗
Step 2						.04	.02
Constant	1.07∗∗∗	0.67	1.48	0.21
Skin tone	0.06	<0.01	0.11	0.03	.13
Ethnic ID	0.09	−0.01	0.19	0.05	.12
Step 3						.05	.01
Constant	0.10∗∗∗	0.42	1.38	0.24
Skin tone	0.06	<0.01	0.11	0.03	.14
Ethnic ID	0.05	−0.07	0.17	0.06	.07
WC	0.01	<0.01	0.01	0.01	.11

Note. N = 207, CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit; WC = womanist consciousness; Ethnic ID = ethnic identity level; Skin tone entered as a covariate.

∗p < .05 ∗∗∗p < .001

A hierarchical multiple linear regression was conducted to test whether higher WC would significantly predict lower SIBD above and beyond ethnic identity alone. Age (covariate) was entered along at step one. Ethnic identity level was entered at step two. As shown in Table 4, the model was significant at step one with 2.5% of the variance in SIBD being explained by age (F[1, 208] = 5.32, p = .02; R² = .025). When ethnic identity level was entered in step two, the variance explained increased to 5.1% and the model was significant, (F[1, 207] = 5.54, p = .01; R² change = .026, F Change = 5.65, p = .02). When WC was entered in step three, the variance explained increased to 7.3% and the model was significant, (F[1, 206] = 5.44, p = .001; R² change = .023, F Change = 5.01, p = .03).

Table 4.

Hierarchical Regression: Womanist Consciousness as a Predictor of Self versus Ideal Body Discrepancy.

Variable	B	95% CI for B		SE B	ß	R ²	Δ R²
Variable	B	LL	UL	SE B	ß	R ²	Δ R²
Step 1						.03	.03∗
Constant	0.65∗	0.23	1.08	0.22
Age	0.02∗	<0.01	0.04	0.01	0.16∗
Step 2						.05	.03∗
Constant	1.11∗∗	0.55	1.68	0.29
Age	0.03∗∗	0.01	0.04	0.01	0.18∗∗
Ethnic ID	−0.14∗	−0.26	−0.02	0.06	−0.16∗
Step 3						.07	.02∗
Constant	1.40∗∗	0.56	0.79	2.02
Age	0.03∗∗	0.01	0.05	0.01	0.20∗∗
Ethnic ID	−0.06	−0.20	0.08	0.07	−0.07
WC	−0.01∗	−0.02	−0.01	0.00	−0.18∗

Note. N = 209, CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit; WC = womanist consciousness; Ethnic ID = ethnic identity level; Age entered as a covariate.

∗p < .05 ∗∗p < .01.

A hierarchical multiple linear regression was conducted to test whether higher WC would significantly predict lower WBD above and beyond ethnic identity level as a predictor. Ethnic identity was entered at step one. Table 5 shows that the model was not significant at step one. Less than one percent of the variance in WBD was explained by ethnic identity level (F[1, 174] = 0.01, p = .92) (R² < .01). When WC was entered in step two, the variance accounted for remained at less than 1 and the model was not significant, (F[1, 173] = .02, p = .98; R² change <.01, F Change = .04, p = .84).

Table 5.

Hierarchical Regression: Womanist Consciousness as a Predictor of Weighted Discrepancy.

Variable	B	95% CI for B		SE B	ß	R ²	Δ R²
Variable	B	LL	UL	SE B	ß	R ²	Δ R²
Step 1						<.01	<.01
Constant	2.41∗	1.28	3.53	0.57
Ethnic ID	−0.02	−0.30	0.28	0.15	−.01
Step 2						<.01	<.01
Constant	2.32∗	0.93	3.73	0.71
Ethnic ID	−0.03	−0.37	0.31	0.17	−.02
WC	<0.01	−0.02	0.02	0.01	.02

Note. N = 175, CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit; WC = womanist consciousness; Ethnic ID = ethnic identity level.

∗p < .05.

Discussion

The current study was an examination of WC as a predictor of Black women’s body image satisfaction, body importance, SIBD, and WBD. The study sought to determine whether WC would predict these outcomes beyond ethnic identity level as a predictor. The hypotheses were partially supported. After controlling for hair texture and hair weaves, higher WC predicted higher body satisfaction beyond ethnic identity level as a predictor. After controlling for skin tone, WC did not however predict body importance. After controlling for age, higher WC predicted lower levels of SIBD beyond ethnic identity level as a predictor. Last, WC did not predict WBD.

In this study, WC was a measure of the extent to which participants reported integrating their ethnic and gender consciousness, viewed the integration as significant to their identity, and wished to improve the status of their ethnic and racial group. The body satisfaction measure focused exclusively on satisfaction with body features that have historically been racially defined (skin tone, hair). The body ideals measure was modified to also include these historically relevant features. Hence, the findings suggest that higher levels of WC may allow Black American women to maintain satisfaction with their features and feel closer to their own ideals of beauty. This finding is consistent with prior studies, which have linked ethnic identity to lower body dissatisfaction and less internalization of mainstream thinness ideals in samples of African American women (Rakhkovskaya & Warren, 2014; Rogers Wood & Petrie, 2010; Zhang et al., 2009). The current study takes the work a step further in demonstrating the importance of intersectional identity as higher WC predicted higher body satisfaction and lower SIBD, beyond ethnic identity level as a predictor.

Womanist consciousness did not predict body importance. The body importance scale includes body type and shape items as opposed to racially defined features only. Higher ethnic identity was linked to placing a higher value on these body features as being important to one’s attractiveness. Because the body importance scale includes items such as body proportions, chest size, and weight, the finding may be consistent with research demonstrating a drive toward “curvaceous” bodies among Black women (Overstreet et al., 2010; Poran, 2006). A curvaceous body ideal is considered more culturally relevant in the Black community with Black women demonstrating concerns about breast and buttock size to meet this ideal (Overstreet et al., 2010; Poran, 2006). This research may help explain why higher ethnic identity, a form of cultural affiliation, which includes cultural values, attitudes, and race (Phinney & Ong, 2007; Pinderhughes, 1989), was linked to placing higher importance on various body features by women in the current study. Because the relationship between WC and body importance was not supported, it likely explains why WC was not related to WBD. If a woman indicated that a particular aspect of her body was not important to her view of attractiveness, then the WBD score for that item was 0 regardless of what her SIBD rating was. Because WBD was calculated as a cross product of body importance SIBD, the unsupported relationship between WC and body importance likely resulted in an insignificant relationship between WC and WBD as well.

Notable findings emerged during the preliminary analyses. Increasing age was found to be positively correlated with increasing discrepancy between self versus ideal body. Prior research examining body image across the lifespan has concluded body satisfaction remains fairly stable across the lifespan, with women over the age of 50 showing increasing body appreciation with increasing age (Tiggemann & McCourt, 2013). The current findings are not in line with previous work; however, it should be noted that previous samples have primarily consisted of white women. Additionally, current study was limited in its ability to explore the role of age given the limited age range of study participants. Further research is required to examine the potential role of aging more fully in Black women’s experience body image.

Correlational findings participants who reported also indicated that darker skin tone also rated themseleves higher on the importance of body features. In other words, darker skinned women rated various body features as more important for their overall attractiveness. Darker skin tone was also associated with higher ethnic identity, in line with previous research suggesting higher levels of ethnic affirmation among darker skinned women (Perry et al., 2013). Higher ethnic identity was also linked to higher body importance in the current study; hence further research is needed to clarify the relationships between skin tone, ethnic identity, and body importance. Skin tone was not related to body satisfaction as measured by the BPSS, consistent with previous research demonstrating no relationship between skin color and body satisfaction (Bond & Cash, 1992; Falconer & Neville, 2000). While skin complexion was not related to body satisfaction, hair was. Higher frequency of wearing hair weaves was associated with lower body satisfaction with historically racially defined features (e.g., skin tone, hair texture). Wearing more traditionally Afrocentric hair textures/styles was associated higher body satisfaction shedding light on a potential body image domain in need of further research.

Other notable preliminary findings emerged when examining the relationship between theoretically relevant and main study variables. Black women attending PWIs scored higher on WC than those attending HBCUs. In the current sample Black women attending PWIs, all of whom self-selected to participate in a study on Black American women, may be more conscious of their multiple minority statuses and these identities may become particularly important in predominantly White spaces. This finding is in line with research demonstrating higher racial salience among African American students at PWIs than those at HBCUs (Steck et al., 2003). Preliminary analyses also found that African American identified women had lower levels of ethnic identity in comparison to women of other ethnic backgrounds. The findings support the need to attend to ethnic heterogeneity among Black Americans given that there may be meaningful differences between ethnic groups (Griffith et al., 2011).

In sum, this study was an attempt to advance the existing literature on protective factors for Black women’s body image satisfaction. The study draws on an intersectionality framework for examining and understanding Black women’s body image experiences. The findings provide quantitative support for previous anecdotal and qualitative work suggesting that skin tone and hair texture influence Black women’s experience of body image and feelings about themselves (Awad et al., 2014; Bellinger, 2007; Robinson-Moore, 2008). Two of the four hypotheses were supported. This is the first known study to demonstrate a relationship between WC and Black women’s body image satisfaction and to demonstrate a relationship between WC and SIBD.

Limitations

The current study had several limitations. While efforts were made to recruit a demographically diverse sample of Black American women, most of the women were currently in college or college educated and identified as African American. The term “Black American Women” was used to reflect the shared racial identity of the women in the sample while acknowledging that not all Black American women identify as “African American.” This distinction is often overlooked in the literature with researchers using the terms interchangeably at times (Griffith et al., 2011). Thus, the findings are somewhat limited in generalizability as they may look differently in a sample with more variability in level of education and ethnic background. The study was limited for the researchers to fully explore the potential role of ethnicity. Participants who identified with “other” African ethnic backgrounds were able to specify their ethnicity but were ultimately grouped into one category due to the wide range of free text responses among a small group of women (N = 37). Furthermore, the group of women identifying as multiethnic was small (N = 13). Due to the small number of women who fell within certain subgroup categories based on college type or ethnicity, we were underpowered to detect group differences between women who attended MSIs versus other types of colleges or to detect group differences between multiethnic women versus other women in the sample (Brooks & Johanson, 2011). As a result, the study was not able to fully examine potentially meaningful differences within these groups of women. Many of the selected measures demonstrated reliability and validity of the scores among African American women but their psychometric properties with other Black American ethnic sub-groups are lacking. Additionally, the BPSS and WCS require more research examining psychometric properties as information is lacking on discriminant validity of the BPSS, and convergent and discriminant validity for the WCS. Furthermore, the WCS and MEIM-R, like much of the literature (Cokley, 2005), use race and ethnicity terms in an undifferentiated manner. Future research must improve upon existing measures in their use to distinguish between race and ethnicity more clearly.

Another measurement limitation was the challenge of assessing racially defined aspects of appearance. Perhaps the most noteworthy issue is the lack of objectivity in participants’ self-report of their skin tone and hair texture. Furthermore, measurements including hair and skin tone components of body image are minimal and at best, inadequate. Research including hair satisfaction has not attended to use of hair weaves and/or chemical straighteners. As the current study demonstrated a relationship between hair practices and body satisfaction, this relationship may be an untapped aspect of Black women’s body image. This finding warrants further empirical research. While Black women’s hair practices can be related to many factors (e.g., preference, convenience, access to Black hair professionals), the findings suggest they can also relate to body satisfaction levels. Lastly, the study was also limited due to how measures were administered. Because participants completed the survey in the same order their responses may have been susceptible to an order effect, evidenced by the increase in missing data with measures presenetd later in the study.

Study Implications

The current study highlights the importance of culturally responsive approaches to assessing, understanding, and protecting against body image issues among Black American women. The intertwined relationships between race, ethnicity, and gender must be attended to when assessing body image concerns and developing interventions for body image dissatisfaction. First and foremost, this involves attention to physical features such as skin color and hair texture as aspects of body image, rather than exclusively weight focused assessments for evaluating and improving body image. Clinicians assessing body image concerns must take a more comprehensive approach to evaluating and addressing body image issues among Black women who have been frequently deemed less concerned about body image than their peers when exclusively weight/body-based measures are used to assess body image satisfaction. In using measures that include these culturally relevant aspects of body image, the current study showed variability in body satisfaction and SIBD among Black American women with varying levels of WC. Furthermore, the study showed relationships between skin tone and body importance as well as relationships between hair styles/texture and body satisfaction. Body image assessments should use sensitive approaches to inquire about how women feel about their skin color and hair in addition to body type and shape. Body positive programs targeted at Black women should include these various aspects of body image satisfaction. This is particularly important given that colorism has resulted in a long history of skin bleaching practices and advertisements targeted at Black women (Glenn, 2008). Regarding the promotion of healthy body image, acknowledgment of the unique gendered racial experiences of Black women is important. Increasing consciousness about these intersecting aspects of identity may aid in increasing body satisfaction as higher levels of WC were found to be related to higher body satisfaction and lower discrepancies between the self versus ideal body in this study.

Future Directions

Future research should examine the body image experiences of culturally diverse samples of Black women. Further research is required to clarify the role of WC in Black women’s body image satisfaction. While research on racial and ethnic identities as constructs and protective factors are well established (Falconer & Neville, 2000; Hesse-Biber et al., 2010; Rakhkovskaya & Warren, 2014; Rogers Wood & Petrie, 2010; Zhang et al., 2009), the literature on intersectional identity within psychology is sparse. Given the paucity of research and empirical data on integrated racial gendered consciousness as measurable construct, the WCS was used due to its demonstrated validity of scores in assessing intersectional identity among various groups of ethnic and racial minority women. Clearly, this literature needs both theoretical and empirical development. The current study points to a need for future examination of increased WC, which in this study was uniquely related to healthier body image among women in the current sample. The study further highlights the need for research examining historically relevant features (skin tone, hair) as part of Black Women’s body image experience.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to give special thanks to Ester Shapiro, Michelle K. Williams, Lizabeth Roemer, Karen Suyemoto, Sarah Gray, Frances Martinez-Pedraza, Lindsey West Rollock, Santiba Campbell, and the research assistants for contributions and support of the research. The author thanks American Psychological Association’s Minority Fellowship Program for nurturance and financial support of the project. Lastly, the author thanks the University Boston for institutional and financial support for the research.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The author did receive funding from APA MFP and UMass Boston.

ORCID iD

Speshal Walker Gautier

Notes

References

Awad

G. H.

Norwood

Taylor

D. S.

Martinez

McClain

Jones

Holman

Chapman-Hilliard

(2014). Beauty and body image concerns among African American college women. Journal of Black Psychology, 41(6), 540-564. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798414550864

Bellinger

(2007). Why African American women try to obtain good hair. Sociological Viewpoints, 23, 63-72. https://search.proquest.com/openview/b7fddd82260825ca5930876775fb19d4/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=38860

Berscheid

Walster

Bohrnstedt

(1973). The happy American body: A survey report. Psychology Today, 7(6), 119-131.

Bond

Cash

T. F.

(1992). Black beauty: Skin color and body images among African American college women. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(11), 874-888. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00930.x

Brooks

Johanson

(2011). Sample size considerations for multiple comparison procedures in ANOVA. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 10(1), 97-100. http://doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1304222940

Burton

L. M.

Bonilla-Silva

Ray

Buckelew

Hordge Freeman

(2010). Critical race theories, colorism, and the decade’s research on families of color. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 440-459. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00712.x

Capodilupo

C. M.

(2014). One size does not fit all: Using variables other than the thin ideal to understand Black women’s body image. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(2), 269-278. https://doi.org:10.1037/a0037649

Capodilupo

Kim

(2014). Gender and race matter: The importance of considering intersections in Black women’s body image. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 61(1), 37-49. https://doi.org:10.1037/a0034597

Cash

T. F.

Szymanski

M. L.

(1995). The development and validation of the body image ideals questionnaire. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64(3), 466-477. https://doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6403_6

10.

Chambers

J. W.

Clark

Dantzler

Baldwin

J. A.

(1994). Perceived attractiveness, facial features, and African self-consciousness. Journal of Black Psychology, 20(3), 305-324. http://doi.org/10.1177/00957984940203005

11.

Chithambo

Huey

(2013). Black/white differences in perceived weight and attractiveness among overweight women. Journal of Obesity, (27), 320326. http://doi.org/10.1155/2013/320326

12.

Coard

S. I.

Breland

A. M.

Raskin

(2001). Perceptions of and preferences for skin color, Black racial identity, and self-esteem among African Americans. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(11), 2256-2274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb00174.x

13.

Cokley

(2007). Critical issues in the measurement of ethnic and racial identity: A referendum on the state of the field. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(3), 224-234. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.54.3.224

14.

Cokley

K. O.

(2005). Racial(ized) identity, ethnic identity, and afrocentric values: Conceptual and methodological challenges in understanding African American identity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(3), 517-526. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.4.517

15.

Cole

E. R.

(2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist, 64(3), 170-180. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0014564

16.

Collins

P. H.

(2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness and the politics of empowerment (2nd ed.). Routledge.

17.

Crenshaw

K. W.

(1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics In Feminist legal theory (Vol. 1989, pp. 139-167). University of Chicago Legal Forum. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8

18.

Dziura

J. D.

Post

L. A.

Zhao

Peduzzi

(2013). Strategies for dealing with missing data in clinical trials: From design to analysis. The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 86(3), 343-358. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3767219/

19.

Falconer

J. W.

Neville

H. A.

(2000). African American college women’s body image: An examination of body mass, African self-consciousness, and skin color satisfaction. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24(3), 236-243. http://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1471-6402.2000.tb00205.x

20.

Frederick

Bohrnstedt

G. W.

Hatfield

Berscheid

(2014). Factor structure and validity of the body parts satisfaction scale: Results from the 1972 psychology today survey. Psychological Topics, 23(2), 223-242. http://doi.org/10.1177/0891243208316089

21.

Glenn

(2008). Yearning for lightness: Transnational circuits in the marketing and consumption of skin lighteners. Gender and Society, 22(3), 281-302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243208316089

22.

Griffith

D. M.

Johnson

J. L.

Zhang

Neighbors

H. W.

Jackson

J. S.

(2011). Ethnicity, nativity, and the health of American Blacks. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 22(1), 142-156. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/414336

23.

Hesse-Biber

Livingstone

Ramirez

Barko

E. B.

Johnson

A. L.

(2010). Racial identity and body image among Black female college students attending predominately White colleges. Sex Roles, 63(9-10), 697-711. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9862-7

24.

Hill

M. E.

(2002). Skin color and the perception of attractiveness among African Americans: Does gender make a difference? Social Psychology Quarterly, 65(1), 77-91. http://doi.org/10.2307/3090169

25.

Jefferson

D. L.

Stake

J. E.

(2009). Appearance self-attitudes of African American and European American women: Media comparisons and internalization of beauty ideals. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33(4), 396-409. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009.01517.x

26.

Keith

V. M.

Lincoln

K. D.

Taylor

R. J.

Jackson

J. S.

(2010). Discriminatory experiences and depressive symptoms among African American Women: Do skin tone and mastery matter? Sex Roles, 62(1), 48-59. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9706-5

27.

Kim

H. Y.

(2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics, 38(1), 52-54. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52

28.

King

(2003). Do you see what I see? Effects of group consciousness on African American women’s attributions to prejudice. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27(1), 17-30. http://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.t01-2-00003

29.

King

K. R.

Fujino

D. A.

(1994). Measuring integrated identities: Preliminary development of the womanist identity scale[Paper Presentation]. American Psychological Association 102nd Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, CA, United States.

30.

Landor

Simons

Brody

Bryant

Gibbons

Granberg

Melby

(2013). Exploring the impact of skin tone on family dynamics and race-related outcomes. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(5), 817-826. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0033883

31.

Maffini

C. S.

Wong

Y. J.

(2015). Feelings about culture scales: Development, factor structure, reliability, and validity. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(2), 213-224. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037647

32.

Maxwell

Brevard

Abrams

Belgrave

(2015). What’s color got to do with it? Skin color, skin satisfaction, racial identity, and internalized racism among African American college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 41(5), 438-461. http://doi.org/10.1177/0095798414542299

33.

McKnight

P. E.

McKnight

K. M.

Sidani

Figueredo

A. J.

(2007). Methodology in the social sciences. Missing data: A gentle introduction. Guilford Press.

34.

Mucherah

Frazier

(2013). How deep is skin-deep? The relationship between skin color satisfaction, estimation of body image, and self-esteem among women of African descent. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(6), 1177-1184. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12081

35.

Overstreet

Quinn

Agocha

V. V.

(2010). Beyond thinness: The influence of a curvaceous body ideal on body dissatisfaction in Black and White women. Sex Roles, 63(1-2), 91-103. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9792-4

36.

Perry

B. L.

Stevens-Watkins

Oser

C. B.

(2013). The moderating effects of skin color and ethnic identity affirmation on suicide risk among low-SES African American women. Race and Social Problems, 5(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-012-9080-8

37.

Phinney

J. S.

Ong

A. D.

(2007). Conceptualization and measurement of ethnic identity: Current status and future directions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(3), 271-281. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.54.3.271

38.

Pinderhughes

(1989). Understanding race, ethnicity, and power: The key to efficacy in clinical practice. Free Press.

39.

Plybon

L. E.

Holmer

Hunter

Sheffield

Stephens

Cavolo

(2006). The impact of body image and Afrocentric appearance on sexual refusal self-efficacy in early adolescent African American girls. Sex Education, 9(4), 437-448. http://doi.org/10.1080/14681810903265360

40.

Poran

M. A.

(2002). Denying diversity: Perceptions of beauty and social comparison processes among Latina, Black, and White women. Sex Roles, 47(1), 65-81. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020683720636

41.

Poran

M. A.

(2006). The politics of protection: Body image, social pressures, and the misrepresentation of young Black women. Sex Roles, 55(11-12), 739-755. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9129-5

42.

Rakhkovskaya

L. M.

Warren

C. S.

(2014). Ethnic identity, thin-ideal internalization, and eating pathology in ethnically diverse college women. Body Image 11(4), 438-445. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.07.003

43.

Robinson-Moore

(2008). Beauty standards reflect Eurocentric paradigms - so what? Skin color, identity, and Black female beauty. Journal of Race & Policy 4(1), 66-85. https://www.proquest.com/docview/212407324

44.

Rogers Wood

N. A.

Petrie

T. A.

(2010). Body dissatisfaction, ethnic identity, and disordered eating among African American women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57(2), 141-153. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0018922

45.

Simien

Clawson

(2004). The intersection of race and gender: An examination of Black feminist consciousness, race consciousness, and policy attitudes. Social Science Quarterly, 85(3), 793-810. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0038-4941.2004.00245.x

46.

Smith

L. R.

Burlew

A. K.

Lundgren

D. C.

(1991). Black consciousness, self-esteem, and satisfaction with physical appearance among African American female college students. Journal of Black Studies, 22(2), 269-283. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2784598

47.

Steck

L. W.

Heckert

D. M.

Heckert

D. A.

(2003). The salience of racial identity among African American and White students. Race and Society, 6(1), 57-73. https://doi:10.1016/j.racsoc.2004.09.005

48.

Stice

Chase

Stormer

Appel

(2001). A randomized trial of a dissonance based eating disorder prevention program. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 29(3), 247-262. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.1016

49.

Tabachnick

B. G.

Fidell

L. S.

(2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.

50.

Thomas

V. G.

(2004). The psychology of Black women: Studying women’s lives in context. Journal of Black Psychology, 30(3), 286-306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798404266044

51.

Thomas

Hacker

Hoxha

(2011). Gendered racial identity of Black young women. Sex Roles, 64(7-8), 530-542. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9939-y

52.

Tiggemann

McCourt

(2013). Body appreciation in adult women. Relationships with age and body satisfaction. Body Image, 10(4), 624-627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.07.003

53.

U.S. Census Bureau . (2021). Measuring racial and ethnic diversity for the 2020 census. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/blogs/random-samplings/2021/08/measuring-racial-ethnic-diversity-2020-census.html

54.

Wade

T. J.

(1996). The relationships between skin color and self-perceived global, physical, and sexual attractiveness, and self-esteem for African Americans. Journal of Black Psychology, 22(3), 358-373. https://doi.org/10.1177/00957984960223006

55.

Watkins

M. W.

(2018). Exploratory factor analysis: A guide to best practice. Journal of Black Psychology, 44(3), 219-246. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798418771807

56.

Watson

Lewis

J.A.

Moody

A.T.

(2019). A sociocultural examination of Black women and body image. Body Image, 31, 280-287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2019.03.008

57.

Wilder

(2010). Revisiting “color names and color notions.” Journal of Black Studies, 41(1), 184-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934709337986

58.

Williams

D. R.

Haile

González

H. M.

Neighbors

Baser

Jackson

J. S.

(2007). The mental health of Black Caribbean immigrants: Results from the National Survey of American Life. American Journal of Public Health, 97(1), 52-59. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2006.088211

59.

Zhang

Dixon

Conrad

(2009). Rap music videos and African American women’s body image: The moderating role of ethnic identity. Journal of Communication, 59(2), 262-278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01415.x