No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 August 2021
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).
To study the attitudes of university students to body modifications considering their personal adaptation potential and experience of body injuring when modifying it.
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.
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).
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.
No significant relationships.
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.