Appearance motives to tan and not tan: Evidence for validity and reliability of a new scale

Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 209-220

  Cafri, Guy ^a   Thompson, J Kevin ^a   Roehrig, Megan ^a   Rojas, Ariz ^a   Sperry, Steffanie ^a   Jacobsen, Paul B ^b   Hillhouse, Joel ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^b H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c EAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Body image; Scale development; Skin cancer; Tanning; UV exposure

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BODY IMAGE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; CRITERION RELATED VALIDITY; CRONBACH ALPHA COEFFICIENT; CULTURAL FACTOR; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; MALE; PERSONAL APPEARANCE; SKIN CANCER; SKIN COLOR; SKIN DEFECT; SOCIAL ASPECT; ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION;

ADULT; BODY IMAGE; FEMALE; FLORIDA; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MOTIVATION; NEOPLASMS, RADIATION-INDUCED; SEX FACTORS; SKIN AGING; SKIN NEOPLASMS; SKIN PIGMENTATION; SOCIAL FACILITATION; SOCIAL VALUES; STUDENTS; SUNSCREENING AGENTS; ULTRAVIOLET RAYS;

EID: 42249111871     PISSN: 08836612     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12160-008-9022-2     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. American Cancer Society: Cancer facts and figures 2006. Retrieved from http://www.cancer.org/docroot/STT/stt_0_2006.asp?sitearea=STT&level=1.
2. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Ultraviolet radiation-related exposures: broad spectrum ultraviolet (UV) radiation, UVA, UVB, UVC, solar radiation, and exposure to sunlamps and sunbeds. In the Tenth Annual Report on Carcinogens (2002). Retrieved August 27th, 2004 from http://ehis.niehs.nih.gov/roc/tenth/profiles/s183uvrr.pdf.
3. Jackson KM, Aiken LS. A psychosocial model of sun protection and sunbathing in young women: The impact of health beliefs, attitudes, norms, and self-efficacy for sun protection. Health Psychol. 2000; 19: 469-478.
4. Hillhouse JJ, Turrisi R, Kastner M. Modeling tanning salon behavioral tendencies using appearance motivation, self-monitoring, and the theory of planned behavior. Health Education Review. 2000; 15: 405-414.
5. Wichstrom L. Predictors of Norwegian adolescents' sunbathing and use of sunscreen. Health Psychol. 1994; 13: 412-420.
6. Leary MR, Jones JL. The social psychology of tanning and sunscreen use: self-presentational motives as a predictor of health risk. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1993; 23: 1390-1406.
7. Mahler HIM, Kulik JA, Gibbons FX, et al. Effects of appearance-based interventions on sun protection intentions and self-reported behaviors. Health Psychol. 2003; 22: 199-209.
8. Gibbons FX, Gerrard M, Lane DJ, et al. Using UV photography to reduce use of tanning booths: a test of cognitive mediation. Health Psychol. 2005; 24: 358-363.
9. Mahler HIM, Kulik JA, Harrell J, et al. Effects of UV photographs, photoaging information, and use of sunless tanning lotion on sun protection behaviors. Arch Dermatol. 2005; 141: 373-380.
10. Hillhouse JJ, Turrisi R. An examination of the efficacy of an appearance-focused intervention to reduce UV exposure. J Behav Med. 2002; 25: 395-409.
11. Cafri G, Thompson JK, Roehrig M, et al. An investigation of appearance motives for tanning: the development and evaluation of the Physical Appearance Reasons for Tanning Scale (PARTS) and its relation to sunbathing and indoor tanning intentions. Body Image. 2006; 3: 199-209.
12. Cafri G, Thompson JK, Jacobsen P. Appearance reasons for tanning mediate the relationship between media influence and UV exposure and protection. Arch Dermatol. 2006; 142: 1067-1069.
13. Vogt DS, King DW, King LA. Focus groups in psychological assessment: enhancing content validity by consulting members of the target population. Psychological Assessment. 2004; 16: 231-243.
14. Lazovich D, Forster J, Sorensen G, et al. Characteristics associated with use or intention to use indoor tanning among adolescents. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2004; 158: 918-924.
15. Demko CA, Borawski EA, Debanne SM, et al. Use of indoor tanning facilities by white adolescents in the United States. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003; 157: 854-860.
16. Davis KJ, Cokkinides VE, Weinstock MA, et al. Summer sunburn and sun exposure among U.S. youths ages 11 to 18: National prevalence and associated factors. Pediatrics. 2002; 110: 27-35.
17. Cardinez CJ, Cokkinides VE, Weinstock MA, et al. Sun protective behaviors and sunburn experiences in parents of youth ages 11 to 18. Preventive Medicine. 2005; 41: 108-117.
18. Cokkinides VE, Davis KJ, Weinstock MA, et al. Sun exposure and sun protection behaviors and attitudes among U.S. youth, 11 to 18 years. Preventive Medicine. 2001; 33: 141-151.
19. Thompson JK, Cafri G (eds): Pursuit of the Muscular Ideal: Social, Psychological and Medical Perspectives. Washington: American Psychological Association, 2007.
20. Fitzpatrick TB. The validity and practicality of sun-reactive skin types I through VI. Arch Dermatol. 1988; 124: 869-871.
21. Goldsmith MF. Paler is better, say skin cancer fighters. JAMA. 1987; 257: 893-894.
22. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1980.
23. Curran PJ, West SG, Finch JF. The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychol Methods. 1996; 1: 16-29.
24. West SG, Finch JF, Curran PJ. Structural equation modeling with nonnormal variables: problems and remedies. In: Hoyle RH, ed. Structural Equation Modeling: concepts Issues and Applications. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage; 1995: 56-75.
25. Bollen K. Modeling strategies: in search of the holy grail. Struct Equ Modeling. 2000; 7: 4-81.
26. Thompson JK, Heinberg L, Altabe M, et al. Exacting Beauty. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; ; 1999.
27. Widaman KF, Reise SP. Exploring the measurement invariance of psychological instruments: applications in the substance use domain. In: Bryant KJ, Windle M, West SG, eds. The science of prevention: methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1997: 281-324.
28. Byrne BM, Stewart SM. The MACS approach to testing for multigroup invariance of a second-order structure: a walk through the process. Struct Equ Modeling. 2006; 13: 287-321.
29. Chen FF, Sousa KH, West SG. Testing measurement invariance of second-order factor models. Struct Equ Modeling. 2005; 12: 471-492.
30. Meredith W. Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika. 1993; 58: 525-543.
31. Marsh HW. Confirmatory factor analysis models of factorial invariance: a multifaceted approach. Struct Equ Modeling. 1994; 1: 5-34.
32. Bryne M, Shavelson RJ, Muthen B. Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: the issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychol Bull. 1989; 105: 456-466.
33. Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling. 1999; 6: 1-55.
34. Hu L, Bentler PM. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychol Methods. 1998; 3: 424-453.
35. MacCallum RC, Browne MW, Sugawara HM. Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structural modeling. Psychol Methods. 1996; 1: 130-149.
36. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct Equ Modeling. 2002; 9: 233-255.
37. French BF, Finch WH. Confirmatory factor analytic procedures for the determination of measurement invariance. Struct Equ Modeling. 2006; 13: 378-402.
38. Chen F, Bollen KA, Paxton P, et al. Improper solutions in structural equation models. Sociol Methods Res. 2001; 29: 468-508.
39. van der Sluis S, Dolan CV, Stoel RD. A note on testing perfect correlations in SEM. Struct Equ Modeling. 2005; 12: 551-577.
40. Bryne BM. Struct Equ Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2001.
41. Allen MJ, Yen WM. Introduction to Measurement Theory. McClendon: Waveland Press; ; 2001.
42. Jackson KM, Aiken LS. Evaluation of a multicomponent appearance-based sun-protective intervention for young women: uncovering the mechanisms of program efficacy. Health Psychol. 2006; 25: 34-46.