final survey report-1

7/30/2019 Final Survey Report-1

1/25

Report:

How do eating habits affect self-

image among students in AUB?

EPHD 213: Survey Methods

Instructor: Zana El-Roueiheb

Deema Dabbagh

Lina Kamareddine

Yara Nagi

Yara Najem

Nour Saab

Karim Traboulsi


2/25

Literature Review

Appearance among young adults in the American University of Beirut seems to be

emphasized in these modern times due to society's judgment. However, students in this

university differ in their eating habits on a daily basis. This intake may fluctuate due to factors

such as gender, self-esteem, self-perceived body image, socioeconomic status, stress levels, and

others. According to general knowledge, good eating habits go along with the "Eat Well Plate"

(Food Standards Agency, n.d.). The question of the matter is whether or not the eating habits of

AUB students reflect on their perception of themselves. Dietary habits vary from a country to the

other. Even though Lebanese food is known to have high nutritive values and to be much

balanced, most Lebanese adolescents worry about their food consumption. This idea is especially

noticed in university students. Once they enter university students dietary habits are shuffled

upside down. Meals are skipped, irregular, lack main food groups, unhealthy and so on. (Yildiz

et al, 2011). However, the causes for that are not clear since there is no single reason on which

all students agree. While some blame it on the lack of time and stress, others blame it on an

overloaded schedule and dormitory conditions (Yildiz et al, 2011). Nevertheless, some factors

given by students, such as socioeconomic backgrounds and friend influence, cause conflicts

among researchers.


3/25

Even though there might be clear differences between males and females in regard to

eating habits and self-perception, it can be observed that people from both sexes do give some

sort of importance to the way they look (too fat, thin, chubby, obese and so on). Individuals

are victims of these words through which they classify their body into distinct groups. However,

these groups that should be centered around scientific data often end up being simply individual

perceptions. Hence the statement: There is an inconsistency between body image and BMI

assessment (Yildiz et al, 2011). The Body Mass Index is a scientific value that correlates ones

weight and height. This index helps delimit three categories: Underweight, Normal, and

Overweight. On the other hand, body image is a subjective perception of the persons body size,

based on social and historical events that shape the individuals way of thinking and self-

satisfaction (Jackson, Reel & Thackeray, 2011; atikka, 2011). When comparing the BMI and

body image of a given person there are very frequently differences between the scientific facts

and the image one gives to his/ her body. People have standards set in their minds due to the

environment that surrounds them. That causes them to go on diets, get eating disorders and so

on. This leads this paper to the part on food consumption.

As for the impact of eating habits and how individuals classify themselves in regards to

body image, literature documents that well. The idea of Body image consciousness has become a

highly conventional area of discussion, especially among the younger generations of today. The

need to fall into societys socially pre-constructed model for perfection has become a routine

practice in most young aged individuals.

A womans body image self-perception has become a routine topic that highly consumes

the minds of mostly younger aged individuals (Jackson, Reel & Thackeray, 2011; atikka,

2011). Body image remains a function of many variables that interplay in ones life, amongst


4/25

them, social environment, personal life, memories and experiences (Jackson et al, 2011). In most

societies predominantly Lebanese, cultural and societal barriers play a significant role in how

women perceive themselves. Results obtained from a study done pertaining to college students in

Turkey showed that women generally had dismissive attitudes towards their bodies (atikka,

2011).

Some researchers argue that psychologically, women tend to be more sensitive to this

topic than males do (Jackson, Reel & Thackeray, 2011; atikka, 2011). Smolak, Levine, and

Thompson challenge the latter stating that body image distortion in males is as strong as females

but not as prevalent since being conscious of body image is a feminine attribute and threatens

their masculinity (Hargreaves, 2006). As a result, many resort to common methods regarding

coping mechanisms. Some of these mechanisms include resorting to religious faith, exercising,

isolation, and excessive eating. The most mentioned was the recurrent notion of eating and

immediate regret thereafter.

Moreover, many people have a negative body image influenced by cultural socialization

that can affect their satisfaction or by historical events (Cash, 2002). In fact, women are more

likely to follow up a diet and try to modify their physical appearance, thoughts, and behavior as a

result of socialization, which encourages them to alter their physical appearance (Jackson et al,

2011).

Speaking of social effects, we get to another factor that might have a great effect on body

weight and self-perception: The socio-economic class. Contradictions in studies are present.

Some consider that economical standing does not have a significant effect on dietary practices

(Mazicioglu, 2003) While others think that the financial status and the personal social circle


5/25

could influence and disrupt regularity and well balanced diets (Singleton et. al, 2011). In general,

students of high economic-status eat less fruits and vegetables and have a larger consumption of

Junk food, beverages, and sweets (Darmon, 2008). Also, having the sufficient financial capacity

to eat more frequently in restaurants where they have fewer chances to eat healthy food, so based

on that, logically they should be the over-weight compared to others. However at the same time

some other studies show that students with lower socio-economic status tend to be more obese

and this is due to the fact that their diet is mainly carbohydrate intensive (Darmon, 2008). That

diet mainly constitutes of items such as rice, bread, and pasta that are inexpensive. In addition,

people of lower socio-economic status have lower chances of partaking in physical exercise, not

to mention that their chances of meeting with specialized dieticians is quite low if not inexistent

(Randall, 2008). To this we can add that in very poor countries, being over weighted is a symbol

of wealth, so people who tend to be obese take advantage of this idea they give of themselves

(Randall, 2008). While in higher socio-economic classes, having a slim body toward their

surrounding should be maintained for their social acceptability, therefore even though they

consume junk food very rarely, they control the quantities they have. Moreover, people of higher

socio-economic classes have the means to afford drastic measures for appearance enhancing:

Plastic surgery.

As for university students in this day and age, it may be commonly assumed that being

the latter goes hand in hand with eating unhealthy, hence deteriorating self-image of oneself on

the way. An interesting twist to this supposition is the practice of restrained eating. Restrained

eating can be explained as constant focus on dieting, weight, and food; the consumption is

controlled and lessened for the purpose of losing weight (Gianini & Smith, 2008). It is apparent

that there is strong link between self-esteem, negative body image, and restrained eating. The


6/25

study at hand examined this relation and what is deemed disinhibition, or loosing that limit on

what is being eaten per day (Gianini & Smith, 2008). This act of failing to comply with rules of

a diet one puts for his or her self is embedded with the idea of stress.

Research indicates that when a restrained eater is going through some sort of stress,

larger capacities of food will be consumed than when that person is not stressed (Gianini 0&

Smith, 2008). This act itself leads to possible weight gain and paints of a picture of no control

over eating habits. The issue lies in the idea that when a restrained eater devours more than what

he or she sees tolerable, that person may feel like a failure; therefore, leading to low self-esteem

(Gianini & Smith, 2008). An effect of continuous negative feeling may result from this. This

lower self-esteem may again lead to failures to comply with personal dietary rules, hence causing

even lower images of ones body image.

The objective of this research was aimed at exploring diversities in Lebanon and to

advance new theories and raise questions in further understanding how adults of todays

generation feel concerning their body image. The fundamentals revolve around the idea of self-

image among students in the American University of Beirut, especially in relation to their daily

eating habits. The literature on this topic is webbed with variables like socio-economic class,

cultural differences, gender, and stress levels. In this study, we will mainly aim at connecting

eating habits with the perception one has of themselves; however, other factors play a role.

Questions about monthly monetary income, hours of study, and living arrangements will also be

building blocks to the concluding connection that will be reached. The significance of the prior

is necessary with calculating if eating habits and negative self-image of oneself go hand in hand.


7/25

Methodology

1. Study Design

The study followed a cross-sectional design in order determine the relationship between students

of the American University of Beiruts eating habits and the resulting impact concerning their

body image. This study type was chosen due to financial and time constraints.

2. Sampling

The sampling conducted was non-probability sampling specifically the convenience type. This

sampling method was utilized because limitations pertaining to time, money and labor were at

hand. Moreover, acquiring a comprehensive list of all AUB students and selecting a more

representative sample was not feasible due to the latter limitations.

3. Data Collection

Participants in this survey were confined to the American University of Beirut. Prior to taking

part in the self-administered questionnaire, participants were asked to read and understand terms

and conditions presented in the confidentiality and descriptive consent form. The results

remained anonymous and no names were demanded.

A total of 120 surveys were dispersed throughout the Bustani and New womens dorms, Penrose

gate, and Faculty of Health science area. Students were also given surveys to complete at Coffee

shops in the Hamra area: Second cup and Gloria Jeans. Surveys were self-administered and

participants were given as much time as needed to complete them, however the majority of

respondents took 10 minutes to fully complete their surveys. Distributors stood within proximity

of participants in case questions were raised. Participants were then asked to return the

questionnaires upon competition to the person who handed them out.

4. Study tools


8/25

The questionnaire consisted of 37 closed and opened ended questions. The standardize questions

ensure data provided by participants would represent similarities and enforced uniform

definitions among participants The questions were divided into four categories, in the respective

order demographics, lifestyle, food habits, and perception of body image. In the first section

(demographics) participants were asked concerning their gender, age, income per month,

satisfaction with income, how much they spent each year, living arrangements, major, and what

year they were. The lifestyle section included questions demanding frequency of workout, what

electronic devices were used for, how many days individuals went out, whether or not

participants took part in extracurricular activities and gym attendance. In addition information

regarding how many hours were spent studying a week, how many hours were spent on

electronics per day, how many days of leisure people had per week and how much money was

spent on food. Concerning the third section relating to food habits, participants were provided

with an Eat Well Plate and asked if their eating habits coincided with the figure. Also,

individuals were asked if they ate breakfast, home food, fast food, snacks. They were also asked

if they frequently ordered food in, if they checked labels prior to consumption, and in general if

they considered themselves healthy eaters. The fourth section termed perception of body image

asked the participants to rate themselves on a scale of 1- 10, if they dieted often, their weight and

height, how they felt concerning their body image, if they were dieting or trying to loose weight,

and whether or not they felt guilty after eating unhealthy.

5. Data analysis.

Surveys were numbered from 1 to 120 to better suite data entry and minimize the occurrence of

errors and further evaluate discrepancies and interferences that might arise. The SPSS version 19

program was used to input data. The data was tabulated as one individual read out the coded

answers to another who physically transferred those values into the computer. Categorical

variables were recoded into different variables in order to simplify data entry. The researches felt

that after administering 120 interviews complete enough data had been collected that could

represent American University of Beirut students. The experimenters ran univariate tests in order

to obtain descriptive analysis and look at the distribution of respondents. Appropriate statistical


9/25

methods were used to draw analysis. In addition bivariate correlations were drawn in order to

detect for relationships between dependent and independent variables.

Tables (Below)


10/25

Table 1: Respondents distribution by demographic characteristics:

Variable N Percentage

Gender

Male 39 32.5

Female 81 67.5

Total 120

Satisfaction withincome

Yes 80 67.2

No 39 32.8

Total 119

Living arrangements

At home 63 53.4

Dorms 43 36.4

Apartment 9 7.6Other 3 2.5

Total 118

Major Business 29 24.4

Sciences 36 30.2

Engineering 19 16

Others 35 29.4

Total 119

Class Year 1 39 33.1Year 2 36 30.5

Year 3 29 24.6

Year 4 and over 14 11.8

Total 118

Age: Mean (SD) 19.83 (1.653)

Income (in $ per month):Mean (SD)

486.56 (359.656)

Spending (in $ per week):Mean (SD)

112.444 (88.9511)


11/25

Table 2: Respondents distribution based on Lifestyle


Frequency of workout

Daily 20 16.7

3-6 days 24 20

1-2 days 37 30.8

Occasionally 28 23.3

Never 11 9.2

Total 120

Use of electronics for:

Studying 79 65.8

Communicating 99 83.2

Work 28 23.3

Entertainment 35 29.4

Total 241

Days going out

Weekends 58 48.3

Weekdays 7 5.8

Both 55 45.8

Total 120

Extracurricular

activities

Yes 49 40.8

No 71 59.2

Total 120

Regular gymattendance

Yes 39 32.8

No 80 67.2

Total 119

Hours studying (perweek): Mean (SD)

9.77 (8.234)

Hours spent onelectronics (per day) :

Mean (SD)

4.97 (4.066)

Days of leisure (perweek) : Mean (SD)

3.12 (1.814)

Money spent on food(per week) : Mean (SD)

61.50 (63.164)


12/25

Table 3: Respondents distribution based on Food habits


Conform to healthyeating habits on figure

Yes, all the time 12 10Yes, most of the time 63 52.5

Only occasionally 32 26.7

No 13 10.8Total 120

Do you consideryourself a healthy

eater?

Yes, all the time 9 7.5

Yes, most of the time 64 53.3

Only occasionally 30 25

No 17 14.2Total 120

Munching on fast food




No 25 20.8

Total 120

Do you eat homemadefood?




No 10 8.4Total 119

When in a hurry, doyou grab healthyfood?


Yes, most of the time 35 29.4Only occasionally 35 29.4

No 13 10.9Total 119

Breakfast

Yes 50 42

No 36 30.3

Sometimes 33 27.7Total 119

Eating location

Home 40 33.3

Dorms 19 15.8

Bliss 21 17.5

Restaurants 40 33.3Total 120

Order in Daily 15 12.54-5 times per week 12 10

1-2 times per week 67 55.8

Rarely/never 26 21.7Total 120

Snackin Coffee 30 25.5


13/25

Chocolate, chips, candy 65 54.6

Fruit 14 11.8

other 10 8.4

Total 119

Checking label


Yes, most of the time 33 27.5Only occasionally 28 23.3

No 43 35.8Total 120

Table 4: Respondents distribution based on perception of their body

image


BMIUnderweight 8 6.7

Normal 85 71.4

Overweight / obese 26 21.8

Total 119

Do you think youweight and height are

proportional?

Yes 72 60

No 48 40Total 120

Body image

Overweight / obese 33 27.7

Normal 78 65.5

underweight 8 6.7Total 119

Trying to lose weightYes 72 60

No 48 40

Total 120

Guilty after eatingunhealthy food

Always 32 26.7

Sometimes 44 36.7

Never 44 36.7

Total 120

Gym after eating

unhealthy food

Yes 29 24.2

No 91 75.8

Total 120

Do you diet often?

Yes, frequently 25 20.8

Yes, few times 41 34.2

No 54 45Total 120

Body rating (on scale of 1to 10): Mean (SD)

6.95 (1.302)


14/25

Table 5: Distribution of respondents by body mass index and

possible independent variables

BMIUnderweight/ Normal Overweight

N (%) N (%) P valueSelf Perception

OverweightNormalUnderweight

16 (48.5)68 (88.3)8 (100)

17 (51.5)9(11.7)0

0.0001

GenderMale

Female

23 (59)

69 (87.3)

16 (41)

10 (12.7)

0.001

Regular Gym attendanceYesNo

27 (71.1)64 (81)

11 (28.9)15 (19)

0.225

Healthy eaterYes, all the timeYes, most of the timeOnly occasionallyNo

8 (88.9)49 (79)24 (80)11 (64.7)

1 (11.1)13 (21)6 (20)6 (35.3)

0.479

Munching on fast foodYes, all the time

Yes, most of the timeOnly occasionallyNo

17 (81)

28 (84.8)30 (76.9)17 (68)

4 (19)

5 (15.2)9 (23.1)8 (32)

0.477

Eating locationHomeDormsBlissRestaurants

23 (71.9)16 (84.2)17 (81)31 (77.5)

9 (28.1)3 (15.8)4 (19)9 (22.5)

0.855

DietingYes, frequentlyYes, few timesNo

18 (75)28 (70)46 (85.2)

6 (25)12 (30)8 (14.8)

0.198

Order inDaily4-5 times /week1-2 times / weekRarely-never

12 (80)9 (75)52 (77.6)19 (79.2)

3 (20)3 (25)15 (22.4)5 (20.8)

0.989

Money spent on food (Mean, SD) 54.71 (34.21) 88.06 (118.227)0.175

Body rating (Mean, SD) 7.14 (1.2228) 6.25 (1.366)0.002


15/25

Results

Table 1 portrays the distribution of respondents based on demographics. Of the 120 total

respondents the majority were female 81 (67.5%) and the remaining 39 (32.5%) were male. The

next variable assessed regarded satisfaction with income, when questioned 80 (67.2%) claimed

they were satisfied and 39 (32.8%) said they were not, the total for this variable count was 119,

this explains the missing values. Next was the living arrangements of participants these were

indicated as the following 63 (53.4%) live at home, 43 (36.4%) resided in dorms, and the

remaining are situated in apartments or other forms living. It should be noted that the total

individual count was 118, 2 people did not respond. Of the choices of majors 29 (24.4%) were

business, 36 (30.2%) sciences, 19 (16%) engineering, and 35 (29.4%) selected other.

Consequently, the total number of respondents was 119 with one missing. The next variable

asked for an indication of years spent in university, 39 (33.1%) were first year, 36 (30.5%)

second, 29 (24.6%) third, and the remaining were completing their fourth year or more. The

respondents totaled at 118 therefore indicating 2 did not answer. The average age of respondents

was approximately 20 years with a standard deviation of 1.653. In addition the average income

per month was $486.56 however the standard deviation was over a broad range from this mean

indicated at $359.656 Also, the average amount of money spent per week from income was

valued at $112.444 and the standard deviation was widely dispersed at 88.9511.

Table 2 shows the respondents distribution based on lifestyle. The first frequency

discussed was the frequency of workout per week. 37 (30.8%), of the 120 respondents, exercise

1-2 days per week. 28 (23.3%), workout occasionally and 24 (20% ) of the 120, exercise 3-6

days per week. The least number of respondents answered daily and never this was displayed

with 20 (16.7%), workout daily and 11 (9.2%) amount of the students never workout. The next

variable discoursed is the purposes for the use of electronics. In this question, students were

allowed to select multiple answers. Of the total 241 students, 99 (83.2%) used electronics for

communication. The next largest usage was for studying, which was 79 (65.8%) of respondents.

The two least usages were for entertainment and work; 35 (29.4%) of the students, used


16/25

electronics for entertainment and 28 (23.3%), used electronics for work. The next variable

entwined with lifestyle is the days people go out per week. Weekends was the highest with 58

(48.3%), of the students go out on the weekend. Only 7 (5.8%), go out on the weekdays. And

55 (45.8%), of the students go out on both the weekends and the weekdays. The next in order of

lifestyle is if the students pursue extracurricular activities. 80 (67.2%), answered No and 39

(32.8%), answered Yes. And finally, figuring if students attend the gym is the last variable. It

should be noted that the total is 119; therefore, 1 person did not answer this question. 39

(32.8%), regularly attend the gym and the majority, 80 (67.2%), dont regularly go to the gym.

On average, participants spent roughly 10 hours on studying per week and the standard deviation

for this measure is valued at 8.234. The average number of hours spent on electronics is 4.97,

with the standard deviation measured at 4.066. The number of days people go out per week is

roughly 3 and the standard deviation is valued at 1.814. Lastly, money spent on food is 61.50

dollars, with the standard deviation at 63.164.

Table 3 shows the respondents distribution based on food and other consumption habits.

Out of 120 respondents, 63 (52.5%) students claimed to eat healthy (according to the eat well

plate) most of the time, while 32 (26.7%) students said they occasionally eat healthy, the

remaining students either eat healthy all the time at 12 (10%) students, and 13 (10.8%) students

never eat healthy in accordance to the eat well plate. As for self-perception as a healthy eater, 64

out of 120 respondents (53.3%), claimed to be healthy eaters most of the time, 30 (25%) claimed

to eat healthy occasionally, 17 (14.2%) of the students did not consider themselves healthy

eaters, 9 students (7.5%) said they eat healthy all the time. Regarding consumption or munching

of fast food, 40 (33.3%) of the 120 respondents claimed the only munch on fast food

occasionally, 33 (27.5%) claimed they munched on fast food most of the time, 25 (20.8%)

students said they never munch on fast food, and 22 (18.3%) said they munch on fast food all the

time.

When it came to the consumption of homemade food, 58 (48.7%) out of 119 respondents

(one person did not complete the question pertaining to this variable in the questionnaire) eat

homemade food most of the time, 29 (24.4%) of the students, 22 (18.5%) claimed that they

consumed homemade food all the time, and the rest of the respondents, 25 (20.8%) said that they


17/25

never eat homemade food. This variable evaluated if the food students grab was of healthy

nature. 36 (30.3%) of 119 respondents (one respondent did not fill the question pertaining to this

variable in the questionnaire) said they grab healthy bites all the time, 35 (29.4%) claimed they

grab healthy bites most of the time, also 35 (29.4%) students claimed they only occasionally grab

healthy quick bites, and 13 (10.9%) stated that they never grab healthy quick bites.

Concerning the consumption of breakfast, 50 respondents (42%) out of 119 (one

respondent did not fill the question pertaining to this variable in the questionnaire) said they

consumed breakfast, 36 (30.3%) claimed they do not consume breakfast, and 33 (27.7%) said

they sometimes consume breakfast. As for location of food consumption, 40 (33.3%) out of 120

respondents said they eat at home, another respondents (33.3%) said they eat at restaurants, 21

(17.5%) stated that they eat at bliss street most of the time, and 19 (15.8%) usually consume food

in dorms.

Out of 120 respondents, 67 (55.8%) order food in once or twice a week, 26 (21.7%)

rarely ordered take out, 15 (12.5%) ordered food in daily, and 12 (10%) ordered food in four to

five times a week. When snacking most respondents consumed chocolate, candy or chips, that

constituted 65 out of 120 respondents (54.6%), 30 respondents (25.5%) snack on coffee, 14

(11.8%) snack on fruits and 10 (8.4%) claimed they snack on other items. As for checking the

nutrition label of a food item, 43 respondents out of 120 (35.8%) claimed they do not check the

food label, 33 (27.5%) claimed they check the food label most of time, 28 (23.3%) check the

food label occasionally, and 16 (13.3%) claimed they check the food label all the time.

Table 4 shows the distribution of respondents based on their perception of their body

image. The BMI was calculated for the respondents, and accordingly categorized as

underweight, normal and overweight/obese. however, the final N percentages were categorized

as Underweight/Normal and Overweight. From the calculations, 85 (71.4%), were normal. 26

(21.8%), were overweight/obese and the rest were underweight. When asked if respondents

believed if their height and weight were proportional, 72 (60%) answered yes and the

remaining of the 120 answered no. The next variable which asked if the students viewed

themselves as overweight/obese, normal, or underweight, a majority (78 or 65.55%) viewed their


18/25

bodies as normal. People who viewed themselves as overweight/obese were 33 (27.7%), of the

total. The remaining viewed themselves as underweight. It should be noted that one person did

not answer this question, so 119 is the total for this variable. The following question asked if the

student was trying to lose weight. The majority, 72 of the 120 or 60%, answered yes and the

remaining answered no. When asked if the student is guilty after eating unhealthy food, the

answer for sometimes and never were equal at 44, or 36.7%. The remaining, 32 or 26.7%,

always felt guilty after eating unhealthy food. The related question, which followed discussed if

students go the gym after eating unhealthy food. 91 out of the 120, or 75.8%, answered no and

the residual answered yes. When asked if the person diets or has dieted, most respondents

answered no at 54 (45%). 41 people (34.2%), said yes, a few times and 25 people, (20.8%),

answered yes, frequently. The last variable discussed in relation to perception was the rating of

the individuals body on a scale of 1-10 (1 being the worst and 10 being the best). The average

number was rounded at about 7 with the standard deviation at a value of 1.302.

Table 5 displays the distribution of respondents based on body mass index and several

independent variables. In surveys, respondents were asked to indicate their weight and height in

order for their body mass indexs to be calculated. The first independent measure that displayed a

significant relationship was that between BMI and self-perception. This was indicated at a p

value of 0.0001. Of those who perceived themselves as overweight, 48.5% of the respondents

were actually underweight/normal by BMI. This compares to those who perceived themselves as

normal, 88.8% were underweight/normal by calculated BMI. Finally, of those who considered

themselves underweight, all respondents fell into the underweight/normal category. In addition,

among the respondents who classified themselves as overweight, 51.5% actually fell into that

category. Subsequently, of those who ranked themselves as normal, 11.7% were actually

overweight. The second variable that shows a crucial relationship is the one between BMI and

gender. This is valued at a p value of 0.001. Among males, BMI calculations showed that 59 %

were underweight/normal as opposed to 87.3% of females that fell into this category. In addition41% of males were overweight compared to 12.7% of females. The next variable that is

compared in the calculations is regular gym attendance. Firstly, it must be noted that the P value

was insignificant due to the fact that it is valued at .225. From the people who arwere under the

underweight/normal category of BMI, 71.1% answered yes and 81% answered no. From the

students who were under the overweight category of BMI, 28.9% regularly go to the gym and


19/25

19% do not. The following variable that is linked is if the respondent is a healthy eater based on

the Eat Well Plate. Furthermore, the P value for this variable is also insignificant at a value of

0.479. From the people who are healthy eaters all the time and from under the

underweight/normal assemblage, 88.9% fall under that grouping. 79% are healthy eaters most of

the time, 80% eat healthy occasionally, and 64.7% are never healthy eaters based on the

referenced Eat Well Plate. From the overweight category based on BMI calculation, 11.1% eat

healthy all the time, 21% are healthy eaters most of the time, 20% count themselves as having

occasional healthy eating habits, and the majority do not at 32%. Munching on fast food is the

following variable that goes hand in hand with the BMI in the calculation. The P value here is

also insignificant due to its value at 0.477. The people who munch on fast food all the time

make up 81% of the overweight/normal category, while the people who munch on fast food

when in a hurry most of the time is the most at 82.8%. The remaining, who much on fast food

occasionally are next at 76.9% and the students who do not at all are 68% of the respondents.

For the overweight category, 19% munch on fast food all the time, 15.2% do the prior most of

the time, 23.1% only munch on fast food occasionally, and the ones who do not at all make up

the largest percentage from the categories at 32%. These results seem inconsistent and go hand

in hand with the insignificant P value. When comparing eating location to BMI, the P value is

insignificant due to the fact that its at 0.855. People who are underweight/normal according to

the BMI and eat at home are 71.9%. The people who mostly eat in dorms make up 84.2%. From

the underweight/normal grouping that eat on bliss, 81% make up that variable and 77.5% lean

more towards their meals at restaurants. Lastly, from the overweight category, it is evident that

the majority eat at home with 28.1% of those respondents. The second highest location under

this category is valued at 22.5% at restaurants. The remaining percentages are 19% for Bliss and

15.8% for dorms. The relationship between BMI and frequency of dieting does not show a

significant relationship and to verify, the p value is 0.198. Among those who diet frequently 75%

of the respondents BMI classified them as underweight/normal. A similar relationship is evident

with the respondents that dieted less frequently, as 70% were actually underweight/normal.

Moreover, of the participants that did not diet, 85.2% were underweight/normal. Furthermore, of

the frequent dieters only 25% were actually overweight. In addition those who claimed to diet a

few times, 30% were overweight, and of those not dieting 14.8% were overweight. The

relationship regarding BMI and ordering in food also displayed an insignificant relationship with


20/25

a p value of 0.989. Of the respondents who order food in daily 80% were underweight/normal,

and with those who ordered in 4-5 times a week 75% were underweight/normal. In addition

those ordering in less frequently at 1-2 times a week carried 77.6% of the respondents and those

never ordering in were 79.2% of the candidates. Furthermore, of the overweight category, 20%

ordered in daily, 25% 4-5 times a week, 22.4% 1-2 times a week, and 20.8% never or rarely did.

Of the people who are underweight and normal, the average spent on food is about 54.71

dollars per week and the standard deviation is 34.21. From the students who are overweight, the

average spent on food is 88 dollars per week and the standard deviation is 118.227. The P value

here is at a value of .175, therefore making it insignificant. Another important variable that

shows a significant association in accordance with BMI is how individuals rated themselves.

This is respected at a p value of 0.002. Of the respondents BMI that classified as

underweight/normal BMI the average body rating was 7.14 with a standard deviation of 1.2228.

Moreover, for those who fell under the overweight category, the average body rating was 6.25

with a standard deviation of 1.366.

Discussion

Our results show that there is a significant relation between BMI and self-perception.

Self-perception is one of the most significant characteristics of this study. In fact, it reflects many

aspects of ones attitude towards food and their behavior. Self-perception is the body image one

has of him/herself, as compared to Body Mass Index (BMI) which is an actual mathematical and

accurate measurement that relates a persons weight to his/her height. The BMI allows

classifying bodies as overweight, underweight or normal. Thus it is interesting to find the

relation between what individuals think of their body as opposed to what their body really is. In

this study, an inconsistency has been shown between body image and body mass index. In fact,

48% of the people that think they are overweight turned out to be underweight or normal, 11.7%

of the students that believe to be normal are actually overweight, and 8% of those that evaluated

themselves as underweight are underweight/ normal. What can be deduced is that there is a

higher tendency for people that think they are overweight to misplace themselves. Nowadays,

there is a certain stereotype people, especially girls, try to follow; people with bodies that dont


21/25

conform to these stereotypes tend to perceive themselves as too fat, or chubby. In addition,

university students dont all have the same degree of confidence. Some are overconfident and

will think their bodies are normal and perfect when they actually are overweight, while others are

not confident enough or satisfied with their body image so they will underestimate their bodies.

Another study in Turkey showed very similar results; what is most shocking in this all girl study

is that none of the girls that believed to be overweight were actually overweight (Yildiz et al,

2011).

Our results also showed that BMI and gender have a significant relationship. Among

males, 41 % are overweight; however, among females, 12.7% are overweight. Females are more

careful about their appearance in society, so they find more care in the impression society has of

them. Hence, they tend to eat healthier food than males do. In addition, females wardrobe

choices incline towards clarifying the shapes of their body; therefore, they usually feel the need

to be put together and fit due to the judgment that lies within society (Jackson et. al, 2011;

atikka, 2011). In addition, women usually spend their free time differently than men do. Based

on the literature, it was found that a womans body image and self-perception has become a

routine topic that highly consumes the minds of mostly younger aged individuals; furthermore,

some researchers found that women tend to be more sensitive to the topic of body mass index

than males are (Jackson et. al, 2011; atikka, 2011). This statement confirms the results

obtained. However, another interesting statement is done by Levine and Thompson; they

challenge the latter stating that body image distortion in males is as strong as females but not as

prevalent since being conscious of body image is a feminine attribute and threatens their

masculinity (Hargreaves, 2006).

The last significant relationship found in our results is between BMI and body-rating.

Self-image is the personal opinion we have about ourselves; usually it is based on the thoughts

we have concerning the perception other people in our surroundings have about us. Therefore,

based on our society, social class, marginalization, personal life, cultures, beliefs,

experiences...we can describe ourselves and rate our body (Jackson et al, 2011). Most of the

time, people underrate themselves by subconsciously imagining they are underweight or

overweight when they actually the opposite; this is mostly due to lack of confidence. Self-esteem

is especially found among university students due to their young age, easily-influenced attitude,


22/25

and peer pressure from friends (Gianini& Smith, 2008). The study we conducted confirms the

above. Among all people were considered as having a normal BMI, the average of self-rating

was 7 over 10. It is not very low; however, it cant be considered an adequate and corresponding

body perception. When analyzing the people who were considered overweight, the average was

6 over 10. It would have been expected that this average would be lower. Therefore, we can say

that the relation between BMI and body rating is subjective. Low or high estimations can occur

and this is because everyone has a person idea of their body based on the factors mentioned

prior.

Although little significance was granted when attempting to find a relationship between

Body Mass Index and eating habits, it is of great interest to visit those findings. Generally and

via the literature, it was assumed that a relation was present between eating healthy and being in

a normal BMI range. However, via this study, the latter phenomenon seemed of little

significance with a P value of 0.479. For example, out of the students that claimed they do not

consider themselves healthy eaters, 64.7% belonged to a normal to under-range BMI. This can

imply that most students that were actually considered normal actually felt that they eat

unhealthy most of the time. Moreover, when examining the results concerning whether one

Munches on fast food, another finding that was insignificant (P value of 0.477), only 19% of

the students that claimed they munch on fast food all the time were overweight according to the

BMI, and only 15.2% of the students that claimed they much on fast food most of the time were

actually overweight. The latter is another finding that didnt seem to be parallel with general

assumptions and literature findings. Assumptions generally associate fast food with non-healthy

fattening food, and the major consumer base of these foods as the overweight population.

Another astounding finding that was not anticipated was that out of respondents that claimed

they are continuously dieting, 75% were actually within the normal to underweight BMI range.

This finding was also insignificant with a P value of 0.198. Although of low statistical

significance, these findings are of very high importance in identifying what assumptions werewrongly taken and how to improve a study by viewing matters with a more objective standpoint.

This research pertaining to the students of AUB resulted in several beneficial attributes

and was also set back by many obstacles. Throughout the research process, the researchers came

across many hurdles that in general may be classified as advantages and disadvantages. Among


23/25

the advantages encountered, it should be noted that the sample size obtained from the students in

AUB recorded at 120 surveys, which in turn was enough to generalize that specific population.

In addition, the surveys indicated a quite diverse variety of responses to many of the questions

presented, in specific how much money is spent per week and how much money is spent on

food. Among the drawbacks of this fieldwork, the most prominent was the lack of financial and

labor resources. Moreover, the amount of time in which this survey was conducted was not

sufficient to fully develop a cohesive analysis. Also, sampling was of non-probability and

therefore hindered results because the generalization can only be made with respect to the AUB

population. It should also be noted that the entire population on campus was not given an equal

chance at being selected to take part in the survey. This may have led to the bias of selecting

participants to complete the survey. Overall, the sample size was not large enough. Because the

questionnaire contained several open ended and personal questions, it is possible that

respondents refrained from providing authentic information; this in turn may have skewed the

results.

The information obtained from the studied survey was intriguing. This is inclusive of the

data that was not only in relation to eating habits and body image. Connections between many

variables were made for the AUB student population in relation to their custom lifestyle and self-

perceptions. When BMI came to play, it was webbed with self-perception, gender, and the rating

students gave their body. The variables were subjective. All of the prior went hand in hand with

significant P values. The relation between BMI, dieting, and healthy eating were insignificant;

however, we found significance in that insignificance. It seems that the bottom line of the study

was that there is no significant relation between ones personal view of body image and

particular eating habits. Possible recommendations may follow the path of using a more diverse

student population, such as questioning different samples in different universities. A wider

variety and comparison could have been achieved. The research question could have been edited

to a specific eating habit instead of eating habits in general. In addition, more questions whichfocus more on eating habits could have been added. Another possibility could be that a specific

group of people who are assured to be aware of their eating habits could have been targeted. For

example, if the questionnaires were only distributed to athletes or nutrition majors. All in all,

even though this study could not be published, it could be used as a stepping stone towards a


24/25

more successful survey due to the fact that the sectors of the study which should be edited are

now bolded.


25/25

References

Jackson, T. S., Reel, J. J., & Thackeray, R. (2011). Coping with 'bad body image days':

strategies from first-year young adult college women.Elsevier, 8(4), 335-342.

atikka, F. (2011). Physical correlates of college students body image satisfaction

levels. Social Behavior & Personality:An International Journal, 39(4), 497-502.

doi:10.2224/sbp.2011.39.4.497

Darmon, N., & Drewnowski, A. (2008, May).Does social class predict diet quality?.

Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18469226

Gearhart, R., Gruber, D., & Vanata, D. (2008). Obesity in the lower socio-economic

status segments of american society . Forum on Public Policy, Retrieved from

http://www.forumonpublicpolicy.com/archivespring08/gearhart.pdf

Gianini, L., & Smith, J. (2008). Body Dissatisfaction Mediates the Relationship Between

Self-esteem and Restrained Eating in Female Undergraduates. International Journal of Behavioral

Consultation and Therapy, 4(1), 1-14. Retrieved from

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=4b668625-a0c4-4c76-9296-

2ab61515609d@sessionmgr4&vid=4&hid=11

Hargreaves, D. A. (2006). "Body image is for girls".Journal of HealthPsychology, 11(4), 567-576. doi: 10.1177/1359105306065017

Mazicioglu MM, Ozturk A. Dietary habits and influencing factors in university students

at 3rd and 4th grades. Erciyes Med J 2003;25(4):172-178.

(n.d.). Food standards agency: the eatwell plate . [Print Photo]. Retrieved

from http://www.food.gov.uk

Singleton, E. K., Bienemy, C., & Hutchinson, S. W. (2011).A pilot study: A descriptive

correlational study of factors associated with weight in college nursing students. Retrieved from

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22165569

Yildiza, E., Demirduzen, S., Dogan, V., Duman, S., Turkmen, N., & Yildiz, A. (2011).

Evaluation of the dietary habits, body images and BMI of Turkish University students who live in

dormitory. Pakistan Journal Of Medical Sciences, 27(1), 85-89.
http://www.food.gov.uk/http://www.food.gov.uk/

final survey report-1

Documents