Pilot Evaluation of the EVERYbody Project

Eating disorder symptoms were assessed with the Eating Disorders Examination Questionnaire (EDEQ; Fairburn & Beglin, 1994). The Global score of the EDEQ was used in this study (average across all 28 items with a 0-6 range; higher scores equal greater eating disorder symptoms).

The Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction with Body Parts Scale (SDBPS; Berscheid, Walster, & Bohrnstedt, 1973) assessed satisfaction and dissatisfaction with nine parts of the body that are commonly endorsed as concerning (e.g., stomach, thighs, hips). The average score was used in this study (average across all 9 items with 1-5 range; higher scores equal greater body dissatisfaction).

The two Internalization subscales of the Sociocultural Attitudes Toward Appearance Questionnaire-4 (SATAQ-4; Schaefer et al., 2015) assess internalized cultural messages surrounding appearance and attractiveness. The two internalization subscales were combined for this study (average across all 10 items with 1-5 range; higher scores equal greater internalization), following prior research by Kilpela et al. (2016).

Negative affect was assessed with 20 items from the fear, guilt, and sadness subscales of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule-Revised (PANAS-X; Watson & Clark, 1992). The average of all 20 items was used in this study with 1-5 range; higher scores equal greater negative affect.

Students with marginalized identities who participated in EVERYbody Project groups were invited to complete semi-structured interviews. Specific question asked were:

• How was your experience with the EVERYbody Project?
• Was anything in the program (any activity or part of the experience) particularly interesting or helpful to you? Why?
• Was anything in the program (any activity or part of the experience) particularly unhelpful or upsetting to you? Why?

(3) The goal of this research was to have conversations about body image that are more inclusive, that is, with diverse individuals who have many different experiences. Do you think this occurred within your EVERYbody Project group? (4) Is there anything you would suggest for improving EVERYbody Project groups to meet the goal stated above? (5) Is there anything else you would like to share with us about the EVERYbody Project?

Additional follow-up prompts were used at the interviewer's discretion.

Satisfaction with the EVERYbody Project (based on Ciao et al., 2015) included four Likert scale items (e.g., "I enjoyed the EVERYbody Project") rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Questions were averaged to create a total "satisfaction" score; higher scores equaled greater satisfaction. Open-ended questions also assessed satisfaction (e.g., "Was any part of the EVERYbody Project particularly helpful/useful? If so, which part and why?"). Satisfaction questions were administered immediately following participation in the intervention (Survey 2).

At post-intervention (Survey 2) and one-month follow-up (Survey 3), three questions gauged application of information learned in the program (e.g., "How often do think about the things you learned in the EVERYbody Project?" rated on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (all the time). Items were averaged to created a total "application" score with higher scores equaling greater application of intervention content.