Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: South Med J. 2014 Jun;107(6):348–355. doi: 10.14423/01.SMJ.0000450708.52011.7c

Table 3. Sex differences within weight misperception methodologies.

Boys Girls χ2 Nominal
Pa
Actual
Pb
Perceived/self-reported, %
 2 × 2 table 16.15 NA <0.0001
  Accurate 65.5 (n = 408) 75.9 (n = 466)
  Misperceptionc 34.5 (n = 215) 24.1 (n = 148)
 3 × 2 table 53.99 NA <0.0001
  Underestimation 29.9 (n = 186) 13.8 (n = 85) 46.34 <0.0001 <0.0002
  Accurate 65.5 (n = 408) 75.9 (n = 466) 16.15 <0.0001 <0.0002
  Overestimation 4.7 (n = 29) 10.3 (n = 63) 14.12 0.0002 0.0004
Perceived/actual, %
 2 × 2 table 19.59 NA <0.0001
  Accurate 63.4 (n = 472) 74.1 (n = 539)
  Misperceptionc 36.6 (n = 272) 25.9 (n = 188)
 3 × 2 table 65.45 NA <0.0001
  Underestimation 34.7 (n = 258) 18.6 (n = 135) 48.73 <0.0001 <0.0002
  Accurate 63.4 (n = 472) 74.1 (n = 539) 19.59 <0.0001 <0.0002
  Overestimation 1.9 (n = 14) 7.3 (n = 53) 24.74 <0.0001 <0.0002
a

P value was obtained from multiple comparisons.

b

For the percentage data of multiple comparisons in categorical data analysis, the correction of adjustment of the significant level was the number of pairwise comparisons minus one.

c

Misperception includes underestimation and overestimation.