New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Eye of the Beholder

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The only factor separating someone from an eating disorder may be a healthy dollop of self-delusion.

Psychologists have tried to identify whether individuals with eating problems have distorted perceptions or feelings about their bodies, but the findings have been unconvincing. Researchers from the University of Maastricht in the Netherlands recently tried a different approach. First they asked individuals from two groups to rate their own attractiveness. One group had symptoms of eating disorders. People in the other, control group had been chosen because their (normal) body sizes were similar to those of the disordered group. The investigators presented pictures of everyone’s bodies, with the heads cropped out, to two panels of evaluators. Somehow, despite the size similarity, both sets of evaluators rated those with eating disorders as less attractive — in accord with the ratings the disordered individuals gave themselves.

In contrast, the control subjects overestimated their own attractiveness, suggesting they have a biased, protective body image. To treat people with eating disorders, doctors might teach them to focus on their attractive features, the experimenters propose.

JR Minkel was a news reporter for Scientific American.

More by JR Minkel
SA Mind Vol 17 Issue 3This article was published with the title “Eye of the Beholder” in SA Mind Vol. 17 No. 3 (), p. 11
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0606-11a

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe