Fitness Ideals in the Self Versus Romantic PartnerJamie LeClerc

California State University, Northridge

Introduction

According to research published by Andreyeva, Puhl, and Brownell in 2008, weight discrimination in the United States is extremely prevalent, increasing to 66% over the last decade.

In general, people hold negative views and attribute negative characteristics towards persons who are obese (Puhl and Heuer, 2009).

Do these weight biases only exist in a safe, idealistic space, or do they translate into our expectations of ideal romantic partners.

Research published in 2005 by Chen and Brown has taken a look into the stigma of obesity in sexual relationships, resulting in males and females both ranking obese partners as the least desirable.

A study on male muscularity found more muscular men to have increased numbers of partners in their lifetime, more short-term sexual partners, and be involved in more sexual relations with married women or women in relationships. Women do prefer men who exhibit high levels of muscularity and fitness (Frederick and Haselton, 2007).

Method

Participants were 79 undergraduate students ages 18 to 25 from California State University, Northridge enrolled in either PSY 150 or 250 recruited using the CSUN Sona Systems. either PSY 150 or 250 recruited using the CSUN Sona Systems.

Participants were 33 males and 46 females reporting that they are currently in a relationship

Participants were asked to fill out a brief, simple, self-report questionnaire. They were given 15 minutes to complete it.

The questionnaire included questions and rating scales assessing self and partner health and fitness.

Hypothesis: Individuals expect significantly higher ideal levels of physical fitness and diet from their romantic partners than the levels they currently exhibit. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that females would report higher expectations of male partner health than males report for female partner health.

Results

Discussion

Design

This research was conducted as correlational study.

Variables: rating of self health, rating of ideal health of romantic partner, gender

To determine a score for self health and ideal health of romantic partner, a few questions were selected for each, giving both ratings a total possible score of 11.

References

A Pearson bivariate correlation was conducted to test whether there was a relationship between personal and partner health ratings. No significant correlations were found, r = .151, p >.05.

Additionally, an independent samples t-test was conducted to test the effects of gender on ratings of participants’ personal health level, as well as their romantic partner’s health level. Results illustrated no significant differences in personal health ratings, based on gender, t(79) = .564, p>.05. There were also no significant differences in romantic partner’s health ratings, based on gender, t(79) = -.869, p>.05.

Further research can build on limitations of this study;. directing the focus away from the actual romantic partner unspecific “ideal” romantic partner and running the study on single individuals could produce an effect.

Reports have shown that there are differences in how important males and females rate general physical attractiveness, with males placing more importance on these physical traits, primarily for short-term partners (Jonasen 2009). Similar measures could be used in the future but in regards to physicality and diet.

The results did not indicate any explicit attitudes about physical fitness expectations, however, it could mean that these health biases have an stronger effect on implicit or benevolent behaviors in dating and romantic relationships.

Male Female0

2

4

6

8

10

Gender Means for Health Ratings

Self Health Partner Health

Chen, E., & Brown, M. (2005). Obesity stigma in sexual relationships. Obesity, 13(8), 1393-1397.Frederick, D., & Haselton, M. (2007). Why is muscularity sexy? Tests of the fitness indicator hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(8), 1167-1183.Puhl, R., & Heuer, C. (2009). The stigma of obesity: A review and update. Obesity, 17(5), 941-964.Jonason, P. (2009). The value of physical attractiveness in romantic partners: Modeling biological and social variables. The Journal of Social Psychology, 149(2), 229-240.