BODY IMAGE DIAGNOSTIC METHOD “SUBJECTIVE ANATOMY”: A MULTIMODAL APPROACH TO QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF PERCEPTUAL-SOMATIC DISCREPANCIES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/psyspu/2025.2.33Keywords:
body image, body schema, psychodiagnostics, method validation, phenomenology of the body self, psychological wellbeing, salutogenic approach, psychosomatics.Abstract
Development and Validation of a Standardized Psychodiagnostic Instrument for Quantitative Assessment of Discrepancies Between Subjective Somatoperceptive Representations and Objective Anthropometric Parameters in the Context of Psychodiagnostics of Individual Characteristics of Body Self Phenomena Such as Body Schema and Body Image. The methodology is based on the integration of neuroperceptive, cognitive, and affective processes in the formation of body perception and on the principles of Moshe Feldenkrais methodology regarding the diagnosis of unconscious body image through analysis of discrepancies between subjective representations and objective parameters. A comprehensive study was conducted with 235 respondents (age: M=42.3±12.7 years; females: n=147, 62.6%; males: n=88, 37.4%). A multimodal diagnostic protocol was applied, including 22 standardized anthropometric parameters with subsequent calculation of perceptual deviation coefficients. The procedure consists of three sequential phases: subjective self-assessment under sensory deprivation conditions, objective anthropometric examination according to IBP and ISAK standards, calculation of coefficients and integral indices (IGV, IAS, ISP). For validation, correlation analysis (Pearson’s r), Student’s t-test, effect size calculation (Cohen’s d), factor analysis, and ROC analysis were used. Significant sex differences in somatoperception accuracy were established (p<0.001): females tend to overestimate the thoracoabdominal region (+21.3%, Cohen’s d=0.79) and underestimate craniofacial parameters (-11.2%, d=0.61), while these distortions are less pronounced in males. Strong correlations were identified between perceptual deviations and psychopathological indicators: depression (r=0.73), anxiety (r=0.67), body dysmorphic disorder (r=0.82), eating disorders (r=0.76). A cognitive hyperbolization mechanism was revealed: the larger the actual size of psychologically significant parameters, the greater their overestimation in subjective perception (strongest correlations: shoulder width in females r=0.67, arm length r=0.64-0.66). Normative ranges and diagnostic criteria for stratification by severity of impairments were developed. The method demonstrates high diagnostic validity and reliability (retest reliability r=0.891, sensitivity 86.3%, specificity 79.1%, AUC=0.847) in detecting clinically significant body image disturbances. Convergent validity was confirmed by correlations with validated instruments (BDDE-SR, BSQ, FRS, BAS-2, MBSRQ-AS). The method is a promising tool for clinical psychology and body-oriented psychotherapy, enabling diagnosis of character structure, psychosomatic risk zones, and monitoring the effectiveness of psychotherapeutic interventions.
References
Cash T. F., Smolak L. Body image: A handbook of science, practice, and prevention. 2nd ed. New York : Guilford Press, 2011. 512 p.
Feldenkrais M. Awareness through movement: Health exercises for personal growth. New York : Harper Row, 1972. 180 p.
Feldenkrais M. The elusive obvious. Cupertino (CA) : Meta Publications, 1980. 180 p. (Reprint: North Atlantic Books, 2019).
Feldenkrais M. The potent self: A guide to spontaneous self improvement. San Francisco (CA) : Harper Row, 1981. 192 p. (Reprin t: North Atlantic Books, 2002).
Gallagher S. How the body shapes the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. 284 p. DOI: 10.1093/0199271941.001.0001.
Head H. Studies in neurology. London: Oxford University Press, 1920. 900 p.
Хомуленко Т. Б., Криничко В. В. Можливості контент-аналізу для структурно-функціональної характеристики когнітивного компоненту тілесного Я. Перспективи та інновації науки (Серія «Педагогіка», Серія «Психологія», Серія «Медицина»). 2025. Т. 10, № 56. С. 1210–1223. DOI: 10.52058/2786-4952-2025-10(56)-1210-1223.
Хомуленко Т. Б., Криничко В. В. Особливості цільової спрямованості в психодіагностиці соматичної пам’яті з урахуванням вікових та психосоматичних характеристик. Наукові інновації та передові технології (Серія «Управління та адміністрування», Серія «Право», Серія «Економіка», Серія «Психологія», Серія «Педагогіка»). 2025. Т. 10, № 50. С. 1337–1350. DOI: 10.52058/2786-5274-2025-10(50)-1337-1350.
Хомуленко Т. Б., Криничко В. В. Історія, закономірності та перспективи розвитку психології тілесності і психосоматики: системний аналіз наукових парадигм. Наукові перспективи (Серія «Державне управління», Серія «Право», Серія «Економіка», Серія «Медицина», Серія «Педагогіка», Серія «Психологія»). 2025. Т. 9, № 63. С. 1361–1376. DOI: 10.52058/2708-7530-2025-9(63)-1361-1376.
Kuehner C. Why is depression more common among women? The Lancet Psychiatry. 2017. Vol. 4, № 2. P. 146–158. DOI: 10.1016/S2215-0366(16)30288-9.
Longo M. R., Haggard P. Implicit body representations and the conscious body image. Consciousness and Cognition. 2012. Vol. 21, № 4. P. 1477–1490. DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2012.04.020.
Merleau-Ponty M. Phénoménologie de la perception. Paris : Gallimard, 1945. 531 p.
Neumark-Sztainer D. Improving body image among adolescents: Public health perspectives. JAMA Pediatrics. 2018. Vol. 172, № 12. P. 1157–1158. DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.2538.
Phillips K. A., Menard W., Fay C., Weisberg R. Demographic characteristics and phenomenology in body dysmorphic disorder. Psychosomatics. 2005. Vol. 46, № 4. P. 317–325. DOI: 10.1176/appi.psy.46.4.317.
Ramachandran V. S., Hirstein W. The perception of phantom limbs: The D. O. Hebb lecture. Brain. 1998. Vol. 121, № 9. P. 1603–1630. DOI: 10.1093/brain/121.9.1603.
Schilder P. The image and appearance of the human body. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., 1935. 353 p. DOI: 10.4324/9781315010577.
Stice E., Shaw H. Role of body dissatisfaction in the development of eating pathology. Psychological Bulletin. 2002. Vol. 128, № 1. P. 83–107. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.83.
Tiggemann M. Body image across the adult lifespan: Stability and change. Body Image. 2019. Vol. 29. P. 29–35. DOI: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2019.02.002.
Tylka T. L., Wood-Barcalow N. L. The Body Appreciation Scale 2: Item refinement and psychometric evaluation. Body Image. 2015. Vol. 12, № 1. P. 53–67. DOI: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.10.001.
Veale D., Miles S., Bramley N., Muir G., Hodsoll J. Am I normal? A systematic review and construction of nomograms for flaccid and erect penis length and circumference in up to 15,521 men. BJU International. 2016. Vol. 115, № 6. P. 978–986. DOI: 10.1111/bju.13010.
