Cargando…

Body modification in university students: Attitudes and role of personal body alteration experience

INTRODUCTION: Body modifications are a common practice in altering one’s appearance. Some authors refer to such practices body injuring (tattooing, piercing) and indirect body modification (dieting, bodybuilding). OBJECTIVES: To study the attitudes of university students to body modifications consid...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vasilieva, E., Nikolaev, E., Mengeliyeva, D., Petunova, S., Petunova, Y.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9470477/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/j.eurpsy.2021.1991
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Body modifications are a common practice in altering one’s appearance. Some authors refer to such practices body injuring (tattooing, piercing) and indirect body modification (dieting, bodybuilding). OBJECTIVES: To study the attitudes of university students to body modifications considering their personal adaptation potential and experience of body injuring when modifying it. METHODS: We surveyed 104 university students aged 17–24 (65.3% males). The first group included 52 students who had experienced body altering (tattooing, piercing), the second group – 52 students without such an experience. We used the Maddi Hardiness Scale to assess the personal adaptation potential and a 14-point questionnaire to estimate the attitude to body modification. RESULTS: Over the half of the students in both groups consider that an insufficiently beautiful body needs “improving” (63.4% и 51.9%), but people do not have to intensively build up their muscles (51.9% и 84.7%). Students with modified bodies look more positively at piercing (z=5.4; p=.0001), weight control (z=5.20; p=.0001) and plastic surgery (z=4.02; p=.0001). Students with unmodified bodies credibly more rarely regard tattoo as decoration (z=3.7; p=.0002) and have a more negative attitude to pediatricians having tattoos (z=2.9; p=.003). Indicators of psychological hardiness in the first group are credibly lower – commitment (р=.01), control (р=.001) and challenge (р=.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Students with a higher adaptation potential limit themselves to indirect body modifications (physical exercises). Students with a lower adaptation potential more often resort to body injuring (tattooing, piercing), which may reflect peculiarities of their personal response to stress or peculiarities of their mental status. DISCLOSURE: No significant relationships.