Table 1. Summary of the Sample, Intervention Content, and Findings from Female-Only Dissonance-Based Program Trials with Effect Sizes^*.

Study	Sample	Intervention	Findings & Effect Sizes (Cohen's d)
Atkinson & Wade (2016)	347 adolescent girls	Randomized trial comparing 3-session dissonance-based intervention (DBI) to mindfulness-based intervention or control	DBI showed significant reductions in sociocultural pressures compared to mindfulness-based intervention and an assessment only control (effects collapsed at all time points) DBI vs control post d = .-06-.32; 1-mo d = .-.19-.31; 6-mo d = .-.03-.41; DBI vs mindfulness intervention post d = .-.13-.26; 1-mo d = .-.09-.33; 6-mo d = .-.20-.03.
Becker, Smith, & Ciao (2006)	90 sorority members	RCT comparing a 4 hr. peer-led DBI to a MA intervention	DBI participants showed greater reductions in TII, BD, and dieting, but not ED symptoms, than media advocacy participants at 7-wk and 8-mo follow-up. Post d = -.07-.36; 1.75-mo d = .08-.50
Becker, Bull et al. (2008)	188 sorority members	RCT comparing a 4 hr. peer-led version of DBI to MA intervention	DBI participants did not show greater reductions in TII, BD, dieting, or ED symptoms than MA participants. Post d = .02-.19; 1.75-mo = -.02-.11; 8-mo = -0.13-.17.
Becker, Wilson et al., (2010)	106 sorority members	RCT comparing a 3.5 hr. peer-led version of the DBI to a modified version of the Healthy Weight (HW) management intervention	DBI showed greater pre-post reductions in TII, negative affect, and ED symptoms, but not BD and dieting, than modified HW participants, but no between group effects persisted through 8-wk, 8-mo, or 14-mo FU. Post d = .19-.44; 2-mo d = .06-.13; 8-mo d = -.04-.36; 14-mo d = .08-.30
Becker, McDaniel, et al. (2012)	157 female athletes	RCT that compared the 4 hr. peer-led version of the DBI to an athlete-modified version of the HW intervention	DBI participants did not show greater reductions in TII, BS, dieting, negative affect, or ED symptoms than HW participants. Post d = .13-.21; 2-mo d = .06-.13; 8-mo d = -.04-.36; 14-mo d = .08-.30
Ciao et al. (2015)	51 high school girls	Non-randomized trial comparing a 3 hr. peer-led version of DBI to a waitlist control with high school girls participating on a mandatory basis within school curriculum	DBI participants did not show significantly greater reductions in outcomes than waitlist controls, though this study was only powered to detect large effects. Between group post d = .08-.26; within group 3 mo follow-up d = .02-.15
Corning et al. (2010)	31 middle school girls and their mothers	RCT comparing 6 hr. version of DBI based on Trost (2006) with a waitlist control with middle school girls with body image disturbance and their mothers	DBI did not show significantly greater reductions in outcomes than waitlist control, though this study was only powered to detect large effects. Post d = .17-.32; within group 3-mo d = .48-.55
Cruwys et al. (2015)	112 girls and women	Uncontrolled study examining mechanism of action in group therapy via a test of the DBI	DBI participants showed a significant pre-post decrease TII, BD, and dieting. Within group post d = .68-.144
Danielsdottir et al. 2012	62 high school girls	RCT comparing the 4 hr Body Project DBI (2007) with the Reflections DBI (2011)	Both DBI conditions showed significant reductions in TII, BD, dieting, and ED symptoms; effects did not differ between groups. Study 1 within group post d = .21-.72; study 2 post d = .04-.81
Green et al. (2005)	155 college females	RCT comparing 4 hr. high-dissonance DBI to a low-dissonance DBI and control condition	High dissonance DBI showed lower ED symptoms compared to low-dissonance DBI at post. Post d = .15; 1-mo d = .17
Greif et al. (2015)	64 sorority members	Uncontrolled study examining effects of a 4 hr. peer-led DBI	DBI showed significant reductions in TII, BD, and ED symptoms at post, significant reductions in TII and ED symptoms at 5-months, no improvements in negative affect. Post d = .17-.93; 5-mo d = -.43-39.
Halliwell & Diedrichs(2014)	106 middle school girls	Non-randomized trial comparing a 1.3 hr. version of the DBI to a waitlist control condition	DBI showed greater reductions in TII and BD, but not dieting, than controls at post-test, and less negative effects of exposure to thin models relative to control at 1-mo follow-up. 1-mo d = .14-.55
Kilpela, DeBoer et al. (2015)	73 female undergraduates	Uncontrolled trial comparing 4 1hr session over 4 week version of peer-led DBI to two 2 hr session over 2 week version of peer-led DBI	Participants in both DBIs showed similar rates of improvement in ED risk factors and symptoms through 12 mo-follow-up except for TII, where participants in 4 week version had lower scores at 6-and 12-mo-follow-ups. 4 1hr sessions; within group post d = .04-56; 6-mo d = .07-.51; 12-mo d = -.05-.80; 2 2-hr sessions; within group post d = .25-.41; 6-mo d = .03-.62; 6-mo d = .12-.61.
Kilpela, Hill et al. (2014)	285 sorority members	RCT tested if undergraduate facilitators trained by other undergraduates to lead DBI produced weaker effects than facilitators trained by doctoral-level trainer.	Participants in both DBI conditions showed significant reductions in TII, BD, dieting, negative affect, and ED symptoms; effects did not differ between groups. Within group post d = .15-.72; 2-mo FU d = .09-.39; 8-mo d = .12-.25; 14-mo d = .14-.40.
Linville, Cobb, Bluhm, et al. (2015)	66 females w/ body image concerns (BIC)	Randomized effectiveness trial comparing 4 hr. version of DBI to educational video control condition in 2 primary care clinics	DBI participants showed significantly greater reductions in TII, pressure to be thin, dieting, ED symptoms, body dissatisfaction, and negative affect at posttest and 3-moth follow-up. Post d = .45-.82; 3-mo d = .18-.75.
Matusek et al. (2004)	84 females w/ body image concerns	RCT comparing a 2 hr. version of a DBI to a psychoeducational or waitlist control condition	DBI participants showed greater decreases in TII and ED symptoms, but not BD, than psychoeducational and waitlist control participants. Waitlist 1-mo FU d = .18-.67; psychoeducation 1-mo d = -.02-.33
McMillan et al. (2011)	124 female students w/ BIC	RCT comparing a 4 hr. high-dissonance to a low-dissonance version of the DBI and a waitlist control	High-dissonance showed greater reductions in TII, BD, dieting, and ED symptoms than control at post; low-dissonance showed greater reductions in TII, BD, and dieting, but no ED symptoms than control; high-dissonance produced showed greater reductions in ED symptoms than low-dissonance. Post d = .28-1.08; 3-mo d = .05-.81
Mitchell et al. (2007)	93 female students w/ BIC	RCT comparing a 4.5 hr. version of DBI to a yoga and control condition	DBI showed greater reductions in TII, BD, ED symptoms, alexithymia, and anxiety than yoga and control groups. Control condition post d = .-.01- .94; yoga condition post d = -.12-.39
Perez et al. (2010)	182 sorority members	Non-randomized study examining effects of 4-hr peer-led version of DBI on ED risk factors	DBI participants showed reductions in BD, TII, dieting, media use as source of beauty information at post-test, 5-mo and 1-yr follow-up. Post d = .08-.44; 5-mo d = -.09- .18; 12-mo d = -.02-.51
Presnell et al. (2008)	133 females w/ BIC	RCT comparing a 4 hr. DBI with an assessment-only control condition	DBI participants showed greater reductions in BD, dieting, and negative affect, but not TII and ED symptoms than controls. Post d = .07-.20; 3-mo d = -.02- .37
Ramirez et al. (2012)	209 dating couples	Non-randomized trial of a 2 hr. couples-based DBI compared to an assessment –only control condition	Dissonance group reduced pressures to be thin, thin and athletic ideal internalization, BD, and actual-ideal body discrepancy. Post d = .03-.59; 1-mo d = .04-.17
Roehrig, et al. (2006)	78 at-risk college women	RCT comparing the 3 hr. version of the DBI with a dismantled version of the DBI with only pure dissonance induction activities	Participants in both DBI conditions showed significant reductions in TII, BD, dieting, and ED symptoms; effects did not differ between groups. Within group post d = .38-79; 1-mo d = .49- .79
Rohde et al., (2014)	81 (study 1) and 52 (study 2) middle school girls	Randomized pilot trials testing 4.5 hr version of DBI versus a psychoeducational control condition for middle school girls with BIC	DBI participants showed greater pre-post reductions in pressure to be thin TII, BD, dieting, negative affect, and ED symptoms than educational brochure controls in the two trials, but effects did not persist through 3-mo follow-up in either trial. Study 1 post d = .17-.89; study 2 post d = .24-.87; Study 2 3-mo d = -.23-.33
Serdar (2006)	343 college women	RCT comparing 3-hr version of DBI to 3 hr. internet version of the DBI and assessment-only control group	Participants in both DBI variants showed significant reductions in BD than controls, but no differences for TII, dieting, negative affect, and ED symptoms; effects did not differ between the two DBI conditions. Group DBI post d = .09-.28; Internet DBI post d = .00- .17
Stice, Butryn et al. (2013); Stice, Butryn et al. (2015)	408 college women with BIC	RCT comparing enhanced 4-hr version of DBI to educational brochure control condition	DBI participants showed significantly greater decreases in TII, BD, dieting, negative affect, and ED symptoms than controls at posttest, and at 1-, 2-, and 3-year FU. Post d = .42- .78; 12-mo d = .15- .55
Stice, Chase, et al. (2001)	87 college females w/ BIC	RCT comparing 3 hr. DBI to HW	DBI participants showed greater reductions in TII and BS, but not dieting, negative affect, or ED symptoms than controls. Post d = .03-.62; 1-mo d = -.05-.91
Stice, Mazotti, et al. (2000)	30 college females w/ BIC	Non-randomized pilot study comparing 3 hr. DBI to delayed-intervention control condition	DBI showed greater pre-post reductions in TII, BS, negative affect, and ES symptoms, but not dieting, than waitlist controls; most effects persisted at 1-month follow-up. Post d = .22-.50; 1-mo d = .14- .67
Stice, Rohde, Durant, & Shaw (2012); Stice, Durant, Rohde, Shaw (2014)	107 college females w/ BIC	RCT comparing a prototype internet (I) version of the DBI with a group (G) intervention, educational video condition, or educational brochure condition	Participants in both the Internet and group DBI interventions showed greater pre-post reductions in TII, BD, dieting, negative affect, and ED symptoms than educational video and educational brochure controls. G DBI vs brochure control post d = .61- .97; 12-mo d = .51-.75; 24-mo d = .19- .71; I DBI vs brochure post d = .41- .80; 12-mo d = -.12- .79; 24-mo d = -.37- .61; G DBI vs video control post d = .35-.54; 12-mo d = .25- .62; 24-mo d = .27- .58; I DBI vs video post d = .14- .53; 12-mo d = -.12- .47; 24-mo d = -.20- .60
Stice, Rohde, et al. (2009); Stice, Rohde, et al. (2011)	306 high school females w/ BIC	Randomized effectiveness trial comparing 4 hr. DBI to psychoeducational brochure control condition	DBI participants showed greater pre-post decreases in TII, BD, dieting, and ED symptoms than controls; certain effects remained significant at 1-, 2-, and 3-yr follow-up. Post d = .21-.54; 6-mo d = .02-.33; 12-mo d = .04- .32; 24-mo d = -.15- .33; 36-mo d = .00- .32
Stice, Rohde et al. 2016	680 females	Randomized effectiveness trial testing an Internet (I) version of a dissonance intervention to a peer-led (PL) and clinician-led (CL) versions, compared to an educational video control condition	All DBI conditions showed greater reductions in TII, BS, dieting, negative affect, and ED symptoms than educational video control at post with most effects holding for CL and PL at FU. At post, CL and PL showed greater reductions on some variables compared to internet DBI; this held for TII and BD (PL only) at FU. Reference group is first group for effect sizes (i.e., negative effects means first group yielded greater effects). CL vs control post d = -.38- -.70; 6-mo d = -.20- -.43; PL vs control post d = -.35- -.71; 6-mo d = -.17- -.52; I vs control post d = -.27- -.45; 6-mo d = -.07- -.26; CL vs I post d = -.16--.30; 6-mo d = -.13- -.22; PL vs I post d = -.02- -.31; 6-mo d = -.10- -.28; CL vs PL post d = -.02- -.15; 6-mo d = -.07- .11
Stice, Shaw, et al., (2006); Stice, Marti, et al. (2008)	481 female adolescents w/ BIC	RCT comparing 3 hr. DBI to HW, expressive writing (EW), or assessment (AO) control group	DBI showed greater decreases in TII, BD, negative affect, ED symptoms, and psychosocial impairment and lower risk for ED onset through 3-yr follow up than assessment only control, with some effects also emerging compared to HW and expressive writing participants. DBI vs AO post d = .28-.84; 6-mo d = .23-.53; 12-mo d = .16- .34; 24-mo d =.09- .38; 36-mo d = .11- .39; DBI vs EW post d = .40- .73; 6-mo d = .11- .49; 12-mo d = .09- .24; 24-mo d =-.04- .36; 36-mo d = -.02-.29; DBI vs HW post d = .16- .38; 6-mo d = .00- .27; 12-mo d = -.13- .22; 24-mo d =-.11- .18; 36-mo d = -.21- .15
Stice, Rohde et al. (2013)	171 in study 1 & 148 in study 2; college females w/ BIC	RCT comparing DBI's led by either peer-led or clinician-led groups to an educational brochure control condition (Study 1), and comparing an immediate peer-led group to a waitlist control condition (Study 2)	Peer and clinician-led DBIs showed significantly greater pre-post reductions in TII, BD, dieting, negative affect, and ED symptoms than control (Study 1); peer-led DBI showed greater pre-post reductions in all outcomes than waitlist (Study 2). Study 1: CL vs control post d = .55- 1.07; 12-mo d = .40- .53; PL vs control post d = .25- .87; 12-mo d = -.21- .41. Study 2: PL vs control post d =.38- 1.12
Stice, Trost, & Chase (2003)	148 college females w/ BIC	RCT comparing 3 hr. DBI to HW and waitlist control groups	DBI showed greater reductions in TII, negative affect and ED symptoms, but not BD and dieting, than controls; DBI did not show greater reductions in outcomes than HW. DBI vs control post d = -.23-.62; 1-mo d = -.06-.23; 3-mo d = .10-78; DBI vs HW post d = -.39- .12; 1-mo d = -.06-.23; 3-mo d = -.09-32; 6-mo d = -.08-16
van Diest & Perez (2013	177 sorority members	Uncontrolled trial examining the effects of a 4-hr. peer-led DBI.	DBI participants showed reductions in TII, self-objectification, BD, and ED symptoms, with most effects persisting through 1-yr. follow-up. Post d = .21- .67; 5-mo d = .08- .19; 12-mo d = .09- .91
Wade, George, & Adkinson (2009)	100 college females	Randomized trial comparing DBI to control, ruminative attention control, acceptance and distraction conditions	DBI, acceptance, and distraction conditions were superior to both control groups in increasing weight satisfaction and to the basic control group for appearance satisfaction. DBI versus control post d = .35- .40; DBI vs rumination control post d = .37- .43; DBI vs acceptance post d = -.24- -.01; DBI vs distraction post d = .70 - -.23.

^*Note: Only published or conference presented studies with at least 15 participants per cell included. Effect sizes are between group unless there was no control group, in which case effect sizes are within group and corrected (see below). Per Morris and DeShon (2002) recommendations for computing effect sizes for meta-analyses that combine repeated measure studies, independent-groups, and independent-group repeated measures designs, we computed effect sizes in a raw-score metric (i.e., standard deviations [SD] based on raw scores as opposed to change scores). Effect sizes were adjusted with a bias-correction function (Hedges, 1982) using the appropriate degrees of freedom (Morris & DeShon, 2002). Sampling variances for effect sizes based on repeated measures requires a pretest-posttest correlation that is typically unreported. Thus, we estimated pretest-posttest correlations based on raw data from two studies conducted Stice et al. (Stice, Rohde, Butryn et al., 2015; Stice, Rohde, Shaw et al., 2016) that was used for all repeated measures studies. Studies with a single-group repeated measures design (i.e., all participants received the intervention and no control group) potentially overestimate effect size because the effect does not contain an adjustment for longitudinal change that would have occurred in the control group. We followed Becker (1988) recommendations in which single-group repeated measures effect sizes are adjusted by first conducting a meta-analysis using only control groups, then subtracting the average control change from single-group repeated measures effect sizes. Mo = Month; FU = Follow-up; TII = Thin-ideal internalization; BD/BS = Body (Dis) Satisfaction; ED = Eating Disorder