Age and Gender Differences in the Relationship Between Actual and Perceived Body

Abstract

We analyzed the relationship between actual and perceived body, the effect of body shape on this relationship, and age and gender differences within it. Descriptive statistics were analyzed using body measurement data of 6,172 Koreans aged 15–69 years, in addition to a survey about perceived body types. We determined the body perception type according to the congruence between perceived and actual body. Using the body proportion index, we identified whether there were physical features depending on perception type. Women perceived their bodies more objectively than did men and eased their physical evaluation standards in their 50s. On the other hand, men tended to underestimate their obesity levels since their youth. In addition, participants underestimating their bodies had a high body mass index. These results provide an overall understanding of the tendency to perceive the body differently by age and gender and may be used as a reference in clothing design.

Keywords

actual body perceived body body perception type

Perceived body refers to personal experience and recognition of a physical body (Tucker, 1982), and actual body refers to the quantitative body expressed with objective numerical values obtained by physical measurements such as body size and weight (Nam & Lee, 2001). There may be differences between the actual body indicated in quantitative dimensions and indices and the perceived body that is assessed subjectively by an individual. Such differences depend on gender, age, and various cultural contexts. Previously, researchers exploring the relationship between perceived and actual body in various fields—including psychology, women’s studies, physical education, and clothing—have either analyzed whether the actual and perceived body match (Shim, 2006) or investigated discrepancies between the actual body and the perceived body (Seong & Makabe, 2004). In addition, they analyzed the effects of discrepancies between one’s actual and perceived body using emotional evaluations, such as body type satisfaction and self-respect evaluations (Shim, 2006); other researchers have investigated the effects of such discrepancies on eating behavior (Seo, 2007).

The studies mentioned above have several limitations. Most studies dealing with the perceived body issue were conducted with a focus on psychology and thus do not consider the relationship between the perceived body and actual body measurements (Nam & Lee, 2001). However, the perceived body, a representative element of one’s body image, is formed through the combination of the physical experience of a body that occupies a space (i.e., size, shape, proportion) and the emotional experience obtained through various experiences in life (i.e., what one thinks or feels about their body; Stokes & Frederick-Recascino, 2003). However, the effects of actual measurements on perceiving the body cannot be overlooked, and given these considerations, they need to be considered together rather than separately. In other studies, researchers have obscured the distinction between the perceived and the actual body. In defining the actual body, in these studies, the subjects themselves report their height and weight in place of quantitative data such as body measurements obtained directly from their bodies (Jeong & Chu, 2010; Madrigal et al., 2000). Technically, however, body measurements obtained as in these studies are closer to perceived rather than actual body measurements, as subject perspectives are involved.

While some researchers have examined whether there is a match between the perceived body and the obesity level as measured from one’s actual body, in the current study, we used an image scale, specifically a nine-figure silhouette scale, to investigate the perceived body (Chen & Swalm, 1998). However, one question that arose was how to match the perceived body as examined through images to corresponding categories of body mass index (BMI) as calculated in quantitative dimensions. In addition, most researchers studying the relationship between perceived and actual bodies mainly targeted females, especially those in their 20s. As such, most studies were limited to a specific viewpoint, age-group, and gender and too few scholars have explored the relationship between actual and perceived body and the effects of gender and age within the same study. However, the perceived body may differ according to the context of the times. Thus, even those in the same age-group may have different perceptions of their bodies depending on the period and background.

Looking at the relationship between actual and perceived body is significant in many ways. It is important to know whether people actually perceive their bodies differently from how they actually are. In particular, to understand the increased rate of obesity in Korean society, it is important to investigate whether the perceived body differs from the actual body, as subjective body type perception is a major motivation behind much obesity management behavior (Yoo et al., 2014). Perceived body types also factor into body satisfaction levels (Ku & Choo, 1996), and the congruence between actual and perceived body is known to affect appearance-related consumption behaviors such as the purchase of clothing (Jeong & Chu, 2010; Roh & Song, 2017). Therefore, investigating the relationship between actual and perceived body in various age groups will help us understand the causes underlying the increased rates of obesity in the population and may also be useful as a basic study in the research on clothing design.

Therefore, in this study, we will assess whether there is a match between the actual body expressed in quantitative dimensions and the perceived body interpreted by the individual. The effects of body type on this relationship will then be examined by comparing different genders and age groups. Analyzing data from actual measurements and relevant surveys across genders and ages will help broaden our understanding of gender and age differences and the possible effects on body perception.

Literature Review

Objectification Theory of Body Image

Objectification theory (Fredrickson & Robert, 1997) explains why mental health problems such as eating disorders and excessive weight control behaviors are more frequently found in young females. According to the theory, in a society where the emphasis is placed on an ideal body shape, females are internalized to have an observer’s perspective toward their physical selves and this perspective enhances self-monitoring, causing negative feelings such as shame and anxiety. Therefore, objectification theory has been employed as an influential framework in many studies focusing on body image and weight control (Mercurio & Rima, 2011; Moradi, 2010).

The discussion with regard to objectification theory was initially centered on the experiences of females (especially young females; Fredrickson & Robert, 1997). The degree of self-objectification appears to depend on the life span of females. It is known that young females are pressured to internalize cultural standards of attractiveness (Moradi, 2010). According to previous studies conducted with Australian and American female university students, the self-objectification scores of young females were higher than those of males (McKinley, 1998; Oehlhof et al., 2009; Tiggemann & Kuring, 2004). In contrast, according to Tiggemann (2004), who studied lifelong variations in body image, elderly females focus more on the functional aspects of the body than on appearance; accordingly, their concerns and anxieties about their perceived distance from the ideal beauty of their societies are decreased.

Research on objectification theory has mainly focused on young females and sexual-minority males (Moradi, 2010). However, recent scholars have shown that social pressure about attractiveness also affects modern males, and young males tend to objectify themselves and can be dissatisfied with their own bodies (Adams et al., 2005; Lim, 2005; Morrison & Morrison, 2003). Applying objectification theory to males, muscularity is idealized and emphasized; this is in contrast to females’ cultural standard, where being thin and weak is equated with attractiveness (Moradi, 2010; Oehlhof et al., 2009).

However, the cultural standards of attractiveness that are emphasized are dependent upon race, ethnic group, and cultural identity. In Western culture, with regard to the ideal male body, a body shape with little fat and much muscle is described as socially attractive, though this has led to the consumption of steroids and compulsive exercise (Tylka et al., 2005). However, according to work by Lim and Paek (2016) on ideal body shapes and weight loss, while Korean females (like females in Western cultures) are more satisfied with a thin body than a fat body, Korean males prefer a fleshy or heavy body with muscles as opposed to a thin body. Moradi (2010) stressed that when approaching gender and cultural diversity in relation to body recognition using objectification theory as a framework, one should first understand the unique pressure of the society, which arises due to the combination of gender, race, nation, and cultural identity.

Research Questions

Gender refers to the connection between nonbiological phenomena and the bodily experience of biological differentiation. Characteristics that we think are related biologically to the male or female actually include several cultural factors (Nelson, 1992). As people are influenced by the cultural context when they perceive their bodies, we use “gender” rather than “sex” in this study, considering the viewpoint that it is the cultural experience of biological difference that constitutes the perceived body. The research questions are as follows:

Does the perceived body differ depending on the actual body (quantitative dimensions)?

Are there age and gender differences in the degree of the match between the actual and perceived body?

Is there a difference in body type depending on the body perception type?

Are there age and gender differences in body perception types?

Method

Research Target and Data

In the present study, we used body measurements collected from 6,172 Korean males and females aged 15–69 years from the National Institute of Technology and Standards’ seventh Human Body Measurements Survey (seventh Size Korea) conducted between May and December 2015, along with a perceived body questionnaire from the same subjects. The seventh Size Korea project was conducted to provide fundamental data through highly efficient and reliable body size analyses. In this project, the measurements were performed with a total of 6,413 subjects (3,199 males and 3,214 females). The technical error of measurement (TEM) index, used to test internal consistency, was utilized to secure reliability of the measurement data, with the analysis showing that the TEM was within the allowable error range (Park & Nam, 2016). The analysis in the present study was conducted using measurement data and survey responses obtained from 6,172 participants in the seventh Size Korea project (3,074 males and 3,098 females), omitting those for whom data were missing. The study participants were divided into groups by age: 15–19 (953 males and 904 females), 20–29 (850 males and 651 females), 30–39 (625 males and 660 females), 40–49 (293 males and 336 females), 50–59 (207 males and 337 females), and 60–69 (136 males and 210 females) to compare the differences between age groups.

Actual and Perceived Body

For the actual body, BMI (m²/kg) was calculated using the subjects’ height and weight. The subjects were sorted into underweight (<18.5), normal weight (18.5 to <23), overweight (23 to <25), and obese (25 and above) categories according to the obesity criterion for Asians (World Health Organization [WHO]. Regional Office for the Western Pacific, 2000). Perceived body was classified based on the answer to the question, “What do you think is your body type according to the obesity scale?” with responses ranging from “underweight (thin),” “normal (appropriate),” “overweight (slightly fat),” to “obese (fat).” The subjects were asked to circle one of four choices about the degree of obesity. Based on the relationship between the actual and perceived body, the following types of body perceptions were defined. The actual body and perceived body were each divided into four groups. The normal weight/average referred to a neutral body, underweight/thin was a thinner body, and overweight/slightly fat and obese/fat more obese bodies. The groups were matched to investigate their relationships, which are described as follows:

Overestimated perception:

When the body is perceived to be more obese than the actual body.

Underestimated perception:

When the body is perceived to be thinner than the actual body.

Matching perception:

When the actual body measurements equal the perceptions of the body.

For example, overestimated perceptions include cases where BMI of the actual body belongs to the low-body weight category but the person is perceived to be average (appropriate), and where BMI of the actual body is in the normal-weight category but the person is perceived to be slightly obese. Underestimated perceptions include cases where BMI of the actual body belongs to the average-weight category but the person is perceived to be slightly thin, and where BMI of the actual body is in the overweight category but the person is perceived to be average (appropriate; Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Types of body perceptions: (a) overestimated perception, (b) underestimated perception, and (c) matching perception.

Indices That Represent Body Type

BMI, calculated using the participants’ actual height and weight measurements, was defined as the actual body. The body drop index, which provides body shape information using measurement differences and proportions between representative parts of the torso, was used for the body type analysis (Lee et al., 2019). In order to analyze differences in body shape according to the type of body perception (overestimated, underestimated, and matching), indices of the breast circumference (chest circumference for males), waist circumference, and hip circumference were selected as indices that represent the body shape from direct body measurements of the study subjects. Each index is defined as shown below:

Breast (chest) circumference/waist circumference:

Index for body curves in the torso; a larger value means more curves in the torso.

Hip circumference/waist circumference:

Index for body curves in the lower body; a larger value means more curves in the lower body.

Breast (chest) circumference/hip circumference:

Index for the balance between upper and lower body; a larger value indicates a greater chest area than the hip.

Waist circumference/hip circumference (WHR):

Ratio of the waist to the hip; a larger value refers to a cylindrical body type without curves.

Data Analysis

To identify the actual physical characteristics of each age-group, males and females were divided into groups consisting of those in 10-year ranges and a descriptive analysis was conducted for height, weight, BMI, chest circumference (breast circumference for females), waist circumference, hip circumference, chest (breast) circumference/hip circumference, hip circumference/waist circumference, chest (breast) circumference/hip circumference, and WHR. Prior to identifying the relationship between actual and perceived body, a descriptive analysis was conducted to analyze the average body dimensions by age-group for the male and female participants. Based on the results of the descriptive analysis, the gender and age characteristics of the actual body were analyzed.

In order to understand the relationship between the actual and perceived body as defined previously, a χ² analysis was conducted between the actual and perceived body category for each of the 10-year age groups by gender, with subsequent verification of whether the χ² value was statistically significant. In addition, for cases where the χ² values were significant, we compared and analyzed whether there were any trends and differences in the distribution of perceived bodies based on the actual body, depending on the gender and age groups.

To analyze whether there were differences in the body shape depending on the type of body perception, whether a difference existed in the mean value of the index indicating the body type according to the body perception type was determined. The Shapiro-Wilk test was utilized to determine whether the data were normally distributed, and if the data showed a normal distribution, a one-way analysis of variance and posttest (Scheffé’s test) was performed. In the absence of a normal distribution, the Kruskal-Wallis test, a nonparametric average difference test, was used. For a postanalysis, the Mann-Whitney U test, a nonparametric t test, was performed in pairs by groups.

Results

Characteristics of Participants’ Body Measurements

The dimensions measured directly from the participants’ bodies represent the characteristics of their actual bodies. Males showed higher BMI values in older age groups. By applying the obesity criterion for Asians (WHO. Regional Office for the Western Pacific, 2000), adolescents were in the normal category, those in their 20s were overweight, and all other age groups were obese. In addition, the average waist circumference was higher for those in the older groups and the body curvature accordingly was reduced with age (Table 1). In females, an older age indicated a higher BMI except for those aged 15–19. Applying the obesity criterion for Asians (WHO. Regional Office for the Western Pacific, 2000), people in their teens to 30s were in the normal range, but those in their 40s and 50s were overweight and those in their 60s were obese. For males, waist circumference became greater with age and body curvature was relatively low in higher age groups. Put together, the results indicate that both males and females had high BMIs and cylindrical bodies with no curvature in the older groups. Unlike the females, the males in their 20s and 30s showed BMIs that indicated they were overweight and obese.

Table 1.

Average Body Measurement Index by Age-Group.

Item(unit)		Mean (Standard Deviation)
Item(unit)		Male						Female
	Age-Group	15–19	In 20s	In 30s	In 40s	In 50s	In 60s	15–19	In 20s	In 30s	In 40s	In 50s	In 60s
	n	953	850	635	293	207	136	953	850	635	293	207	136
Height (cm)		172.65 (5. 54)	173.94 (5.71)	173.14 (5.33)	170.39 (5.40)	168.14 (5.54)	165.34 (5.14)	159.68 (5.14)	160.09 (5.10)	160.26 (5.36)	157.12 (52.74)	154.61 (5.10)	152.95 (4.69)
Weight (kg)		66.04 (11.91)	72.64 (11.69)	75.84 (10.73)	73.51 (10.53)	70.71 (8.78)	66.87 (9.07)	55.35 (8.55)	55.35 (8.93)	57.78 (9.47)	58.24 (8.49)	58.55 (7.56)	59.16 (7.69)
Body mass index		22.12 (3.63)	23.98 (3.47)	25.27 (3.17)	25.28 (3.15)	24.98 (2.61)	25.10 (2.92)	21.69 (3.07)	21.36 (3.13)	22.49 (3.53)	23.60 (3.30)	24.48 (2.82)	25.27 (2.95)
Breast circumference (cm)		90.98 (7.13)	96.33 (6.86)	98.87 (6.18)	98.66 (6.43)	97.36 (5.12)	96.85 (5.34)	84.22 (7.25)	84.18 (7.16)	87.31 (7.80)	89.73 (7.69)	92.71 (6.87)	94.54 (6.93)
Waist circumference (cm)		75.54 (9.15)	81.38 (9.15)	85.79 (8.14)	86.56 (8.16)	87.04 (7.06)	88.44 (7.84)	71.00 (7.44)	71.61 (7.51)	76.18 (8.76)	78.89 (8.31)	82.36 (7.56)	86.10 (8.00)
Hip circumference (cm)		93.08 (6.96)	96.23 (6.38)	97.28 (5.51)	95.54 (5.59)	93.85 (5.14)	92.54 (4.89)	92.76 (5.68)	92.89 (6.14)	93.70 (6.26)	93.49 (5.37)	92.76 (5.15)	92.66 (5.16)
Chest circumference/hip circumference		1.21 (0.07)	1.19 (0.08)	1.16 (0.07)	1.14 (0.07)	1.12 (0.06)	1.10 (0.06)	1.19 (0.06)	1.18 (0.06)	1.15 (0.06)	1.14 (0.05)	1.13 (0.05)	1.10 (0.05)
Hip circumference/waist circumference		1.24 (0.07)	1.19 (0.07)	1.14 (0.06)	1.11 (0.06)	1.08 (0.05)	1.05 (0.06)	1.31 (0.08)	1.30 (0.08)	1.24 (0.09)	1.19 (0.09)	1.13 (0.08)	1.08 (0.07)
Chest circumference/hip circumference		0.98 (0.04)	1.00 (0.05)	1.02 (0.04)	1.03 (0.04)	1.04 (0.04)	1.04 (0.04)	0.91 (0.05)	0.91 (0.05)	0.93 (0.05)	0.96 (0.06)	1.00 (0.06)	1.02 (0.06)
Waist circumference/hip circumference		0.81 (0.05)	0.84 (0.05)	0.88 (0.05)	0.90 (0.05)	0.93 (0.05)	0.95 (0.06)	0.76 (0.05)	0.77 (0.05)	0.81 (0.06)	0.84 (0.06)	0.89 (0.06)	0.93 (0.06)

Relationship Between Actual and Perceived Body

In order to ascertain the relationship between the actual and perceived body, a χ² analysis was conducted between the actual and perceived body categories for each 10-year group by gender. All cross-analyses showed that the χ² values were statistically significant and that the categories of the perceived body differed according to the actual body category.

Among the males aged 15–19, most (90.5%) reported being thin while being in the underweight category for their actual body weight, while nearly half (49.5%) reported an average body perception while being in the normal weight category for their actual body, indicating a matching perception in the underweight and normal weight categories. However, 43.8% reported that they were “thin” despite the fact that they were in the normal category for their actual bodies, indicating that many were underestimating their bodies (Table 2). In the overweight category of the actual body among the male adolescents, 57.3% responded “average” for perceived body while in the obese category; 63.3% responded that they were “slightly obese.” This shows that there were underestimations in the overweight and obese categories. Among females aged 15–19, on the other hand, 64.4% reported being “thin” when they were actually underweight, 67.5% reported an “average” perceived body when their actual body was “normal,” and 73.8% reported being “slightly obese” when their actual body was overweight, showing that their actual and perceived body matched and that they were perceiving their bodies objectively. However, in the “obese” category for females aged 15–19, 54.8% reported that they were “slightly obese,” showing that in this actual body category, participants tended to underestimate their bodies as compared to the other actual body categories.

Table 2.

Cross-Analysis of Actual and Perceived Body for Those Aged 15–19, 20s, and 30s.

Age	Sex	Group by BMI classification		Perceived Body				Total	χ²
Age	Sex	Group by BMI classification		Thin	Average	Slightly Obese	Very Obese	Total	χ²
15–19	Male	Per actual body	Underweight	105^a (90.5%)	11 (9.5%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	116 (100%)	688.760***
			Normal	230^a (43.8%)	260^a (49.5%)	33 (6.3%)	2 (0.4%)	525 (100%)
			Overweight	6 (4.2%)	82^a (57.3%)	54 (37.8%)	1 (0.7%)	143 (100%)
			Obese	4 (2.4%)	20 (11.8%)	107^a (63.3%)	38 (22.5%)	169 (100%)
		Overall	345 (36.2%)	373 (39.1%)	194 (20.4%)	41 (4.3%)	953 (100%)
	Female	Per actual body	Underweight	65^a (64.4%)	35 (34.7%)	1 (1.0%)	0 (0.0%)	101 (100%)	784.410***
			Normal	33 (6.0%)	374^a (67.5%)	144 (26.0%)	3 (0.5%)	554 (100%)
			Overweight	1 (0.7%)	28 (19.3%)	107^a (73.8%)	9 (6.2%)	145 (100%)
			Obese	0 (0.0%)	4 (3.8%)	57^a (54.8%)	43^a (41.3%)	104 (100%)
		Overall	99 (11.0%)	441 (48.8%)	309 (34.2%)	55 (6.1%)	904 (100%)
20s (20–29)	Male	Per actual body	Underweight	25^a (92.6%)	1 (3.7%)	1 (3.7%)	0 (0.0%)	27 (100%)	574.768***
			Normal	159^a (47.2%)	157^a (46.6%)	19 (5.6%)	2 (0.6%)	337 (100%)
			Overweight	7 (3.4%)	133^a (65.2%)	61 (29.9%)	3 (1.5%)	204 (10 %)
			Obese	1 (0.4%)	54 (19.1%)	173^a (61.3%)	54 (19.1%)	282 (100%)
		Overall	192 (22.6%)	345 (40.6%)	254 (29.9%)	59 (6.9%)	850 (100%)
	Female	Per actual body	Underweight	70^a (71.4%)	26 (26.5%)	2 (2.0%)	0 (0.0%)	98 (100%)	753.964***
			Normal	38 (9.6%)	255^a (64.7%)	101 (25.6%)	0 (0.0%)	394 (100%)
			Overweight	0 (0.0%)	24 (22.9%)	78^a (74.3%)	3 (2.9%)	105 (100%)
			Obese	0 (0.0%)	3 (5.6%)	14 (25.9%)	37^a (68.5%)	54 (100%)
		Overall	108 (16.6%)	108 (47.3%)	195 (30.0%)	40 (6.1%)	651 (100%)
30s (30–39)	Male	Per actual body	Underweight	25^a (92.6%)	1 (3.7%)	1 (3.7%)	0 (0.0%)	27 (100%)	574.768***
			Normal	159^a (47.2%)	157^a (46.6%)	19 (5.6%)	2 (0.6%)	337 (100%)
			Overweight	7 (3.4%)	133^a (65.2%)	61 (29.9%)	3 (1.5%)	204 (100%)
			Obese	1 (0.4%)	54 (19.1%)	173^a (61.3%)	54 (19.1%)	282 (100%)
		Overall	192 (22.6%)	345 (40.6%)	254 (29.9%)	59 (6.9%)	850 (100%)
	Female	Per actual body	Underweight	70^a (71.4%)	26 (26.5%)	2 (2.0%)	0 (0.0%)	98 (100%)	753.964***
			Normal	38 (9.6%)	255^a (64.7%)	101 (25.6%)	0 (0.0%)	394 (100%)
			Overweight	0 (0.0%)	24 (22.9%)	78^a (74.3%)	3 (2.9%)	105 (100%)
			Obese	0 (0.0%)	3 (5.6%)	14 (25.9%)	37^a (68.5%)	54 (100%)
		Overall	108 (16.6%)	108 (47.3%)	195 (30.0%)	40 (6.1%)	651 (100%)

***p < .001.

^a40% frequency or higher.

Among the males in their 20s, most reported being thin when they were actually underweight (92.6%); however, all others underestimated their obesity by reporting it as being one level below the actual body category. In particular, this underestimation tendency was apparent in the overweight and obesity ranges for the actual body. Among all actual body categories, only 1.5%–7.4% overestimated their perceived body. For the females in their 20s, on the other hand, 71.4% reported being thin when their actual body was underweight, 64.7% reported an average perceived body when their actual body was in the normal category, 74.3% reported being “slightly obese” when their actual body was overweight, and 68.5% reported being very obese when their actual body was obese, such that most participants’ actual and perceived body categories matched.

Like the males in their 20s, those in their 30s tended to underestimate their perceived bodies in all actual body categories, except for those in the underweight category. In total, 56.4% reported being thin when their actual body was in the normal range, 69.1% reported being average when their actual body was overweight, and 66.6% reported being slightly obese when their actual body was obese, indicating a tendency to underestimate. This tendency was especially evident in the overweight and obese categories as compared to the normal actual body category. In contrast, females in their 30s, like those in their 20s, tended to have matching perceptions of their actual and perceived body. However, there were more cases where they reported being slightly obese (54.9%) than obese (40.2%) when they were in the obese category of the actual body.

Males in their 40s showed similar results to those of males in their 20s and 30s, but underestimations increased in all categories compared to those in the younger groups (Table 3). Females in their 40s showed results similar to those in their 30s, but 61% reported being slightly obese when they belonged to the obese category of the actual body, which was a slight increase compared to the responses from those in their 30s (54.9%).

Table 3.

Cross-Analysis of Actual and Perceived Body of Those in Their 40s, 50s, and 60s.

Age	Sex	Group by BMI classification		Perceived Body				Total	χ²
Age	Sex	Group by BMI classification		Thin	Average	Slightly Obese	Very Obese	Total	χ²
40s (40–49)	Male	Per actual body	Underweight	6^a (85.7%)	0 (0.0%)	1 (14.3%)	0 (0.0%)	7 (100%)	453.870***
			Normal	79^a (56.4%)	57^a (40.7%)	4 (2.9%)	0 (0.0%)	140 (100%)
			Overweight	12 (7.3%)	114^a (69.1%)	39 (23.6%)	0 (0.0%)	165 (100%)
			Obese	2 (0.6%)	65 (20.1%)	215^a (66.6%)	41 (12.7%)	323 (100%)
		Overall	99 (15.6%)	236 (37.2%)	259 (40.8%)	41 (6.5%)	635 (100%)
	Female	Per actual body	Underweight	33^a (70.2%)	13 (27.7%)	0 (0.0%)	1 (2.1%)	47 (100%)	510.349***
			Normal	37 (9.8%)	223^a (59.0%)	117 (31.0%)	1 (0.3%)	378 (100%)
			Overweight	0 (0.0%)	20 (17.7%)	86^a (76.1%)	7 (6.2%)	113 (100%)
			Obese	0 (0.0%)	6 (4.9%)	67^a (54.9%)	49^a (40.2%)	122 (100%)
		Overall	70 (10.6%)	262 (39.7%)	270 (40.9%)	58 (8.8%)	660 (100%)
50s (50–59)	Male	Per actual body	Underweight	1 (100%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	1 (100%)	188.040***
			Normal	26^a (57.8%)	17 (37.8%)	1 (2.2%)	1 (2.2%)	45 (100%)
			Overweight	5 (8.6%)	32^a (55.2%)	20 (34.5%)	1 (1.7%)	58 (100%)
			Obese	1 (1.0%)	24 (23.3%)	74^a (71.8%)	4 (3.9%)	103 (100%)
		Overall	33 (15.9%)	73 (35.3%)	95 (45.9%)	6 (2.9%)	207 (100%)
	Female	Per actual body	Underweight	2 (100%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	2 (100%)	185.141***
			Normal	23 (22.5%)	57^a (55.9%)	21 (20.6%)	1 (1.0%)	102 (100%)
			Overweight	0 (0.0%)	42^a (41.6%)	58^a (57.4%)	1 (1.0%)	101 (100%)
			Obese	0 (0.0%)	13 (9.8%)	84^a (63.6%)	35 (26.5%)	132 (100%)
		Overall	25 (7.4%)	112 (33.2%)	163 (48.4%)	37 (11.0%)	337 (100%)
60s (60–69)	Male	Per actual body	Underweight	2^a (100%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	2 (100%)	84.840***
			Normal	11 (36.7%)	18^a (60.0%)	1 (3.3%)	0 (0.0%)	30 (100%)
			Overweight	2 (5.3%)	27^a (71.1%)	9 (23.7%)	0 (0.0%)	38 (100%)
			Obese	0 (0.0%)	17 (25.8%)	43^a (65.2%)	6 (9.1%)	66 (100%)
		Overall	15 (11.0%)	62 (45.6%)	53 (39.0%)	6 (4.4%)	136 (100%)
	Female	Per actual body	Underweight	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0.0%)	0 (0%)	87.267***
			Normal	12 (26.7%)	29^a (64.4%)	4 (8.9%)	0 (0.0%)	45 (100%)
			Overweight	1 (1.8%)	32^a (56.1%)	23^a (40.4%)	1 (1.8%)	57 (100%)
			Obese	3 (2.8%)	20 (18.5%)	63^a (58.3%)	22 (20.4%)	108 (100%)
		Overall	16 (7.6%)	81 (38.6%)	90 (42.9%)	23 (11.1%)	210 (100%)

***p < .001.

^a40% frequency or higher.

Males in their 50s tended to underestimate in all actual body categories except for the underweight category, like those aged 15–19 and in their 40s. In particular, 71.8% reported being slightly obese when their actual body was in the obese category. They had the highest proportion of underestimation among all age groups and genders. Females in their 50s, on the other hand, mostly gave matching answers for perceived body in all actual body categories except for the obese category. In this case, 57.8% reported being slightly obese for perceived body when they belonged to the overweight category, representing the highest proportion, but 41.6% perceived themselves as average, indicating a somewhat different trend from females in the teen to 40s groups. More than 70% of females in their teens to 40s gave matching responses of “slightly obese” for perceived body when their actual body was overweight, which shows that people in their 50s have characteristics somewhat different from those in their teens to 40s.

Males in their 60s tended to underestimate their perceived bodies compared to their actual body categories. In contrast, females in their 60s generally responded similarly to those in their 50s. Among all age groups of females, they were the only case where more people answered average (56.1%) for their perceived body compared to those who answered “slightly obese” (40.4%).

Analyzing the results in general, both males and females are more likely to underestimate as they grew older, and the proportion of those both overestimating and reporting a matching perception decreased. However, in males in all age groups except for teenagers, underestimated answers accounted for the largest percentage among all types of body perceptions, whereas for females in age groups younger than 50 years, approximately 60% had matching estimations of their actual and perceived bodies, which was the highest figure. In male age groups other than teenagers, underestimation was the greatest tendency among all types of body perceptions. In particular, for males in their 30s, underestimation accounted for 76.7% of the whole and increased significantly with age. It can be inferred that for males, the criterion for body perception is relaxed in their 30s, earlier than that for females (Figure 2). For females in their teens to 40s, a matching perception had the highest frequency among the types of body perceptions, while those in their 50s and 60s showed higher rates of underestimation. The criterion for body perception was significantly relaxed in their 50s.

Figure 2.

Distribution of the types of body perceptions by gender and age-group: (a) overestimated perception, (b) underestimated perception, and (c) matching perception.

Differences in Body Shape According to the Type of Body Perception

In females in their teens, all body type indices showed a significant difference in the average values according to the body type (p < .001; Table 4). For breast circumference/waist circumference, when the data showed a normal distribution, the underestimating group showed significantly smaller values than overestimating and matching groups. In other words, the group that underestimated their bodies showed less curvature in the upper body. As there were no normal distributions in the remaining categories, the Mann-Whitney U test was performed in pairs of matching types after a nonparametric average value test. It was revealed that for hip circumference/waist circumference, the underestimating group showed significantly smaller values than the overestimating and matching groups. With regard to breast circumference/hip circumference, WHR, and BMI, the overestimating group showed significantly higher values than the underestimating and matching groups. Thus, in female adolescents, greater underestimation of their body meant that their upper and lower body had less curvature and a higher obesity index.

Table 4.

Difference in Body Shape Index According to the Type of Body Perception in Females.

Normal distribution item	Age	Item	Overestimation	Matching	Underestimation	F
	15–19	n	192	589	123
		Breast circumference/waist circumference	1.201 (0.055)	1.189 (0.061)	1.174 (0.064)	7.858***
		Breast circumference/waist circumference	B		A	7.858***
		n	192	589	123
	20s	n	132	440	79
		Breast circumference/waist circumference	1.183 (0.054)	1.181 (0.058)	1.160 (0.046)	5.284**
		Breast circumference/waist circumference	B		A	5.284**
		Hip circumference/waist circumference	1.316 (0.068)	1.304 (0.080)	1.280 (0.077)	5.340**
		Hip circumference/waist circumference	B		A	5.340**
		Breast circumference/hip circumference	0.901 (0.043)	0.908 (0.047)	0.908 (0.048)	1.240
	30s	n	159	391	110
		Breast circumference/waist circumference	1.150 (0.055)	1.154 (0.060)	1.136 (0.060)	4.123*
		Breast circumference/waist circumference	B	AB	A	4.123*
		Hip circumference/waist circumference	1.238 (0.069)	1.248 (0.088)	1.205 (0.088)	10.830***
		Hip circumference/waist circumference	B		A	10.830***
	40s	n	37	202	97
		Breast circumference/waist circumference	1.135 (0.047)	1.146 (0.051)	1.132 (0.052)	2.420
		Hip circumference/waist circumference	1.208 (0.066)	1.206 (0.082)	1.162 (0.089)	9.667***
		Hip circumference/waist circumference	B		A	9.667***
		Breast circumference/hip circumference	0.942 (0.055)	0.953 (0.058)	0.978 (0.055)	8.127***
			B		A
Nonnormally distributed items	Age	Item	Overestimation	Matching	Underestimation	Kruskal-Wallis H
	15–19	n	192	589	123
		Hip circumference/waist circumference	1.329 (0.070)	1.318 (0.079)	1.268 (0.085)	43.838***
		Breast circumference/hip circumference	0.905 (0.044)	0.904 (0.048)	0.927 (0.047)	27.027***
		WHR	0.755 (0.042)	0.762 (0.048)	0.792 (0.055)	43.838***
		Body mass index	20.958 (1.814)	21.418 (3.039)	24.144 (3.564)	72.864***
	20s	n	132	440	79
		WHR	0.762 (0.040)	0.770 (0.050)	0.784 (0.050)	8.821*
		Body mass index	20.958 (1.783)	21.379 (3.448)	22.113 (2.841)	6.933*
	30s	n	159	391	110
		Breast circumference/hip circumference	0.930 (0.041)	0.928 (0.055)	0.945 (0.052)	9.249*
		WHR	0.811 (0.045)	0.806 (0.060)	0.834 (0.061)	21.404***
		Body mass index	21.678 (1.646)	22.302 (3.872)	24.343 (3.589)	37.716***
	40s	n	37	202	97
		WHR	0.831 (0.045)	0.833 (0.057)	0.866 (0.067)	17.745***
		Body mass index	21.809 (1.427)	23.169 (3.210)	25.054 (3.117)	41.833***

Note. Scheffé’s test results A < B. WHR = waist circumference/hip circumference.

*p < .05. ***p < .001.

For females in their 20s, there were statistically significant differences in all body type indices, except for the breast circumference/hip circumference. Among the items with a normal distribution of the data, in the breast circumference/waist circumference and hip circumference/waist circumference, the underestimating group showed significantly greater values than the matching and overestimating groups. The group that underestimated their bodies showed less curvature in the upper and lower body. Additional Mann-Whitney U tests for items with no normal distribution of the data indicated significantly greater means in the underestimating compared to the overestimating and matching groups for WHR and BMI. In other words, the group with more underestimation of their body had a higher obesity index.

For females in their 30s and 40s, the difference in the average value of the breast circumference/waist circumference was not significant by group or statistically significant; however, as in the younger age groups, more underestimation of the body meant less curvature in the body. In addition, with regard to WHR and BMI, for which females in their 30s and 40s did not a show normal distribution of the data, the underestimating group showed a significantly higher value than the overestimating and matching groups, as in the younger age groups.

For females in their 50s and 60s, there was either no significant difference in all body shape indices, except for BMI, or if there was a significant difference (p < .05), the group was not clearly divided according to its size in the postanalysis. With regard to BMI, females in their 50s and 60s who underestimated showed significantly greater average values than the matching and overestimating groups (p < .001).

Teens in their 30s to 60s, Mann-Whitney U tests were conducted between the matching and underestimating groups, excluding the overestimating group as the sample size ranged from only one to six. Several body type indices showed significant average value differences depending on the type of body perception in adolescents and those in their 20s, but the postanalysis did not clearly distinguish between the groups or exhibit a clear tendency with regard to perception type. For males in their teens to 60s, the group that showed more underestimation had higher BMI values (adolescents: Kruskal-Wallis H = 34.238, p < .001; 20s: Kruskal-Wallis H = 26.614, p < .001; 30s: Mann-Whitney U test = 27574, p < .001; 40s: Mann-Whitney U test = 6343, p < .05; 50s: Mann-Whitney U test = 1981, p < .001; 60s: Mann-Whitney U test = 1030, p < .001).

Based on the results of the analysis, the difference in body type according to the type of body perception was analyzed, followed by gender and age-group. First, for both males and females, the group that underestimated their bodies showed a higher obesity level. Regarding the differences between male and female participants, for females in their teens to 40s, the underestimating group showed a small index that represented body curvature, whereas in all age groups for males, there were no differences in the index representing body curvature according to the type of perception. When compared based on age, more underestimation meant less body curvature for females in their teens to 40s but this trend did not arise for those in their 50s and 60s. This is consistent with the fact that in the relationship between actual and perceived body when analyzed earlier, females in their 50s showed characteristics distinct from those of the other age groups.

Discussion

Although young females maintained a normal body weight in prior studies in various fields in the 1990s–2000s, when body image and perceived body studies were actively conducted, it was found that many females had false perceptions of their bodies in that they considered themselves overweight (Jeong & Chu, 2010; Roh & Song, 2017; Ross, 1994; Seo, 2007). In comparison, the females in this study tended to have a matching view of their actual and perceived body instead of overestimating their bodies. Body size overestimation is highly correlated with eating disorders such as anorexia nervosa. Body size overestimation is frequently found not only among patients with eating disorders but also in the general population, and it is negatively correlated with self-esteem (Thompson & Thompson, 1986). However, although we showed in this study that females perceived their bodies relatively objectively, it would be difficult to interpret these results as young females today having a more positive view of their own physical shape than in the past. Franzoi (1995) notes that females are more likely than males to recognize their bodies as an object and view each part as a subject of aesthetic evaluation. This view strengthens the cultural pressure on achieving the ideal body, causing females to have a negative attitude toward their bodies. Rather than conclude that females, despite the fact that they are more objectively aware of their obesity levels, are forming a positive body image, we should leave open the possibility that females who are more frequently under cultural pressure are more likely to apply various criteria to assess their physical shape objectively.

The proportion of females in their 50s who underestimate their bodies has increased dramatically compared to younger age groups, and a distinct result is that there is no difference in body shape according to the type of body perception. According to Tiggemann (2004), in a study of changes in body images during the life span, the evaluation criteria for bodies in old age move from appearance to functional aspects. In particular, in younger age groups, cultural pressure on the appearance of the body is strongly exerted, and the importance of appearance is reduced exceptionally as they age into the elderly category, where physical aging occurs. Several scholars have reported that older females have body image resilience (Choate, 2005; Tiggemann, 2004). In the present study, we also showed that females in their 50s and older are more tolerant of overweightness and obesity than are younger age groups in their perceived body assessments and that they have stronger body image resilience.

Recent researchers have shown that social pressure about good looks is exerted on modern males, like the pressure on females (Adams et al., 2005; Morrison & Morrison, 2003), and that this trend is prominent among some young people who are greatly affected by the media (Lim, 2005). Body surveillance refers to surveillance of oneself through continuous comparisons with the socially ideal beauty as delivered by mass media, being preoccupied with one’s own body. This is the motive of appearance management, which refers to acts of improving body image, including weight loss, using makeup, engaging in physical exercise, and greater skincare. Recently, the stereotype of linking appearance management with a specific gender has dissolved considerably (Lim, 2005). However, according to a study conducted by Kim and Cho (2010), who analyzed appearance management by male and female university students in Korea depending on their gender and who studied the factors of appearance management as well, although male looks are considered important in our modern society, female university students showed a higher level of media pressure, body surveillance, sociocultural recognition of appearance, and weight management intention compared to male university students. In the present study, we also showed that teens and those in their 20s (i.e., the younger age groups) tend to recognize their perceived body in a relatively objective manner in comparison with males of other age groups. Nevertheless, in comparison with the females here, the ratio of subjects whose category of perceived body was identical to the category of their actual body was considerably lower.

It is also noteworthy that for males in their 30s, there was a sharp increase in the underestimation of their bodies. According to an article about obesity among Koreans, 49% of Korean males in their 30s are obese (MBC News, 2018). Perceived body distorted by underestimations may become a predictive factor of obesity or overweightness (Madrigal et al., 2000). In addition, subjective body perception is a major motivation that influences weight control behavior (Yoo et al., 2014), though the trend of underestimation of their bodies by males in their 30s appears to be contributing to obesity problems in Korean society.

Objectification theory explains individuals’ acts of continuously comparing appearances considered attractive in society with their own appearance and undertaking self-monitoring of their appearance. However, the social standards of attractiveness depend on the society. In the present study, male subjects in all age groups underestimated their actual body versus perceived body in comparison with female subjects. With regard to the ideal body shape in Korean society, Lim and Paek (2016) reported that Korean males prefer a fleshy body or a heavy body with muscles to a thin body. In addition, Korean males undertake less self-monitoring of their appearance (Kim & Cho, 2010) compared to Korean females, and they have the cultural standard of preferring a large body regardless of the muscle mass. This may be why Korean males who are overweight or obese consider their bodies as “appropriate.” Given our assessment of body perceptions, we hope the present study will enhance our understanding of the increase in obesity in Korean society.

By analyzing the relationship between perceived and actual body from one point of view for a broad age-group, this study is significant in that we present a survey of currently perceived bodies at a time when the environment has changed considerably since the 1990s–2000s. In addition, it was possible here to identify a point at which body perception characteristics change by investigating age groups from adolescents to those in their 60s, rather than selecting and analyzing a specific age-group. Clearly, further research is needed to determine why body perception characteristics change at a particular age, but even so, this study is significant in that it is the first that simultaneously approached the relationship between the perceived and actual body of a fairly large number of individuals from different age groups, including both males and females.

This study used BMI as the basis for grouping actual bodies, but BMI defines the range of obesity based on medical criteria such as the prevalence and rate of cardiovascular diseases. Another important issue about BMI is related to the concept of “muscle tone.” BMI, based on weight and height, does not reveal the composition of the body. Muscle tissue, given its high density, can inadvertently shift BMI into the overweight and obesity ranges. Although BMI is a common indicator in body shape analysis studies, one limitation is that the classification of BMI categories may differ from the obesity category that actual people perceive or from the body category that people consider as ideal. Although we analyzed the relationship between actual and perceived body using data from actual measurements of different genders and age groups, as well as a survey, a quantitative approach may be insufficient for an in-depth understanding of this phenomenon. To glean a further understanding of the phenomenon, additional interviews including various gender and age groups via a qualitative approach should be conducted to identify the basic aspects of individuals’ experiences.

Footnotes

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: This research was supported by Support Program for Women in Science, Engineering and Technology through the Center for Women in Science, Engineering and Technology (WISET) funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (Grant No. WISET202003GI01).

ORCID iDs

Jooyeon Lee

Yun-Ja Nam

Jinhee Park

References

Adams

Turner

Bucks

(2005). The experience of body dissatisfaction in men. Body Image, 2, 271–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2005.05.004

Chen

Swalm

(1998). Chinese and American college students’ body-image: Perceived body shape and body affect. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 87, 395–403. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1998.87.2.395

Choate

L. H.

(2005). Toward a theoretical model of women’s body image resilience. Journal of Counseling & Development, 83(3), 320–330. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2005.tb00350.x

Franzoi

S. L.

(1995). The body-as-object versus the body-as-process: Gender differences and gender considerations. Sex Roles, 33(5–6), 417–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01954577

Fredrickson

B. L.

Roberts

T.-A.

(1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(2), 173–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x

Jeong

S. J.

Chu

M. S.

(2010). The effects of somatotype and body image on apparel fashion orientation. Fashion & Textile Research Journal, 12(6), 764–776. https://doi.org/10.5805/KSCI.2010.12.6.764

Kim

Cho

K.-M.

(2010). A study on the effect factor of male and female college students in cosmetic management intention and weight management intention. Journal of the Korean Society of Cosmetology, 16(1), 244–253.

Y. S.

Choo

T. G.

(1996). A study on body cathexis and clothing involvement by demographic characteristics. Family and Environment Research, 34(5), 29–39.

Lee

Park

Nam

Y. J.

(2019). A study on body shape characteristics of elderly men and women—Focusing on the application of various obese indices. Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles, 43(2), 184–203. https://doi.org/10.5850/JKSCT.2019.43.2.184

10.

Lim

I.-S.

(2005). Men acceptance level of body-management and their appearance anxiety. Korean Journal of Sociology, 39(6), 87–118.

11.

Lim

I.-S.

Paek

S. K.

(2016). A comparative study on the ideal body-shape and the preference for weight loss. Korean Journal of Sociology, 50(4), 169–202. https://doi.org/10.21562/kjs.2016.08.50.4.169

12.

Madrigal

Sánchez-Villegas

Martínez-González

Kearney

Gibney

Irala

Martinez

(2000). Underestimation of body mass index through perceived body image as compared to self-reported body mass index in the European Union. Public Health, 114(6), 468–473. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ph.1900702

13.

MBC News. (2018, December 10). Men in their 30s 49% ‘obesity’…Obesity socio-economic costs 11 trillion won [Press release]. https://imnews.imbc.com/news/2018/society/article/5047033_30801.html

14.

McKinley

N. M.

(1998). Women and objectified body consciousness: Mothers’ and daughters’ body experience in cultural, developmental, and familial context. Developmental Psychology, 35, 760–769. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.35.3.760

15.

Mercurio

Rima

(2011). Watching my weight: Self-weighing, body surveillance, and body dissatisfaction. Sex Roles, 65, 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9980-x

16.

Moradi

(2010). Addressing gender and cultural diversity in body image: Objectification theory as a framework for integrating theories and grounding research. Sex Roles, 63, 138–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9824-0

17.

Morrison

T. G.

Morrison

M. A.

(2003). Striving for bodily perfection? An exploration of the drive for muscularity in Canadian men. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 4, 111–120. https://doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.4.2.111

18.

Nam

Y.-J.

Lee

S.-H.

(2001). Comparison of perceived body size and actual body size between Korean and American college women. Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles, 25(4), 764–772.

19.

Nelson

J. A.

(1992). Gender, metaphor, and the definition of economics. Economics and Philosophy, 8, 103–125. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026626710000050X

20.

Oehlhof

M. E.

Musher-Eizenman

D. R.

Neufeld

J. M.

Hauser

J. C.

(2009). Self-objectification and ideal body shape for men and women. Body Image, 6, 308–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2009.05.002

21.

Park

Nam

Y. J.

(2016). Analysis of technical error of manual measurements. Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles, 40(4), 641–649. https://doi.org/10.5850/JKSCT.2016.40.4.641

22.

Roh

Y.-K.

Song

H. K.

(2017). Effects of real body, perceived body, self-discrepancy and body satisfaction on garment fit satisfaction of women in their twenties: Focused on women’s jacket. Fashion & Textile Research Journal, 19(6), 768–776. https://doi.org/10.5805/SFTI.2017.19.6.768

23.

Ross

C. E.

(1994). Overweight and depression. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 35(1), 63–79. https://doi.org/10.2307/2137335

24.

Seo

Y. J.

(2007). A survey on body-type recognition and weight adjustment according to BMI of university student. Journal of Korean Society for the Study of Physical Education, 12(1), 165–180.

25.

Seong

M. J.

Makabe

(2004). A study of body size and body cognition of Korean female college students. Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea, 23(2), 81–92.

26.

Shim

J. H.

(2006). A comparative study of the middle-aged women’s real somatotype and cognitive somatotype. Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles, 30(11), 1507–1518.

27.

Stokes

Frederick-Recascino

(2003). Women’s perceived body image: Relations with personal happiness. Journal of Women & Aging, 15(1), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1300/j074v15n01_03

28.

Thompson

J. K.

Thompson

C. M.

(1986). Body size distortion and self-esteem in asymptomatic, normal weight males and females. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 5(6), 1061–1068. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-108X(198609)5:6<1061::AID-EAT2260050609>3.0.CO;2-C

29.

Tiggemann

(2004). Body image across the adult life span: Stability and change. Body Image, 1(1), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1740-1445(03)00002-0

30.

Tiggemann

Kuring

J. K.

(2004). The role of body objectification in disordered eating and depressed mood. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43, 299–311. https://doi.org/10.1348/0144665031752925

31.

Tucker

A. L.

(1982). Relationship between perceived somatotype and body cathexis of college males. Psychological Reports, 50, 983–989. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1982.50.3.983

32.

Tylka

T. L.

Bergeron

Schwartz

J. P.

(2005). Development and psychometric evaluation of the Male Body Attitude Scale (MBAS). Body Image, 2, 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2005.03.001

33.

World Health Organization. Regional Office for the Western Pacific. (2000). The Asia-Pacific perspective: Redefining obesity and its treatment. https://iris.wpro.who.int/handle/10665.1/5379

34.

Yoo

J.-E.

D.-S.

Kim

N.-K.

(2014). How does body-shape perception affect the weight control practices? 2012 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Journal of Society of Korean Medicine for Obesity Research, 14(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.15429/jkomor.2014.14.1.29