Methodology

Need of study:

As now a day’s adolescents are very much conscious about the way they look or about their body image, it is very much important to know the extent to which they are effected in some of the basic aspects of their life such as loneliness or in perceiving social support. The purpose of this research is to find out the relation between loneliness, perceived social support and body image as on some point of life everyone has been judged on the basis of their body image which somehow effects the individual. Sometimes society ignores the person because of their appearance which leads to loneliness in the person.

Objective:

1. To study and compare body image among male and female college students.
2. To study and compare loneliness among male and female college students.
3. To study and compare perceived social support among male and female college students.
4. To examine the relationship between Body image, loneliness and perceived social support among male and female college students.

Hypothesis:

1. There will be significant difference between body image among college students.
2. There will be significant difference between loneliness among college students
3. There will be significant difference between Perceived social supports among college students
4. There will be significant relationship between body image, loneliness and perceived social support.

Research design:
Sample: For the purpose of the study 70 college students would be selected from the age group (18-30years) out of which 36 would be male and 34 would be female.
Inclusion criteria:
Students from the age group 18-30 years.
Students from the Indian population.
Students who are able to read and understand English.
Exclusion criteria:
Students below 18yrs and above 30 yrs. of age.

Design

Tools

1. Multidimensional scale of perceived social support: The multidimensional scale of perceived social support (MSPSS) is a self-report measure of subjectively assessed social support. This 12-item instrument uses a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 “very strongly disagree” to 7 “very strongly agree”. The scale was divided into 3 subscales: Family, friends and significant other, with each section consisting of 4 items. Who or what participants consider a significant other is up to their discretion.

Reliability- Cronbach’s coefficient alpha, a measure of internal reliability, was obtained for the scale as a whole as well as for each subscale. For the significant other, Family, and friend’s subscales, the value were 0.91, 0.87, and 0.85, respectively. The reliability of the total scale was 0.88. These values indicate good internal consistency for the scale as a whole and for the three subscales.

Validity- It was found that the Thai-MSPSS had a negative correlation with the state trait anxiety inventory (r = 0.20, p = 0.004) and the Thai depression inventory (TDI) (r = -0.19, p = 0.007), but was positively correlated with the Rosenberg self-esteem scale (r = 0.33, p<0.0001). Moreover, it was found that the Rosenberg self-esteem scale correlated with all three sub-scales, whereas the anxiety and depression scales correlated more with the FR sub-scale than with the others

Age range: 13 and above

1. UCLA loneliness scale: Developed by psychologist Daniel Russell (1996), the UCLA loneliness scale is 20-item measure that assesses how often a person feels disconnected from others using a 4-point rating scale ranging from O (“I often feel this way”), S (“I sometimes feel this way”), R (“I rarely feel this way”), N (“I never feel this way”).
   Reliability: The UCLA measure was highly reliable, both in terms of internal consistency (coefficient alpha ranging from .89 to .94) and test-retest reliability over a 1-year period (r = 0.73).

Validity: Convergent validity for the scale was indicated by significant correlations with other measures of loneliness. Construct validity was supported by significant relations with measures of the adequacy of the individual's interpersonal relationships, and by correlations between loneliness and measures of health and well-being.
Age range: Teens and adults

1. Figure rating body dissatisfaction scale for males and females respectively: The version of the figure ratings measure utilize in this study was adapted by Fallon and Rosin (1985 and 1988 respectively) from Stunkard, Sorenson and Schlesinger (1980). It consists of nine female figure drawings that range from very thin to very fat. Each figure corresponds to a number from 10-90, where 10 is thinnest and 90 is fattest. The subject was asked to choose a number representing the figure of their choice and they were encouraged to use intermediate numbers.
   Age range: 18 and above.

2. Body image dissatisfaction scale: The body image dissatisfaction scale was constructed by Goldner (199) and consists of 10 self-report items that assess global attitudes to physical appearance. Score range from 10-40, with higher scores indicating greater dissatisfaction and more negative attitudes about body image.
   Age range: 18 and above.

PROCEDURE

Informed consent will be taken from the participant and they will be provided with the questionnaire through Google forms. Purpose of the study will be explained to the participants Four scales will be given to the participant to mark their response. And the participants will be thanked there cooperation