After the factor analysis of the items of the scale, two major factors of positive body image emerged. After close consideration of the contents of items of each factor, they were labelled as body appreciation and body effectiveness. The details of the two components are as under:

Body Appreciation

            The items of Factor 1 were labelled as body appreciation. The body appreciation referred to the respect, satisfaction, acceptance, positive feelings, attractiveness, self-enhancing effects and God-giftedness of body and its attributes. This name was appropriate as it involved respect for the body, good feeling, non-comparison, attractiveness, high satisfaction with the body and its attributes, promotive aspects (exercise), desire for acceptance of real body and its attributes by others, enhancing (self-confidence, happiness), positive perception (many good qualities) and a gift of God. These attributes of positive body image were also evident in the verbalizations of the participants of the qualitative study. It consisted of 11 items.

Body Effectiveness

            This body effectiveness dimension consists of the items that consisted of the effectiveness of body in achieving various life success and outcomes and helpful in achieving social praise, opportunities, positive feedback, identity as well as positive efforts. This label was appropriate as body effectiveness was reported to be helpful in life success, adjustment, beauty, effective social relationships, effective personality, attractive capacity, social praise and status, life opportunities, positive responses of others, familiarity, positive efforts (systematic routine, Sport/Gaming) and positive social and interpersonal outcomes of the participants. 

Psychometric Properties

            The reliability and validity of the components and overall scale were estimated. The details are as under:
Reliability
            The scale comprises of two dimensions of positive body image: body appreciation and body effectiveness comprising 11 items and 13 items, respectively. The reliability was estimated by computing Cronbach’s Alpha which was .878, .844 and .903 body appreciation, body effectiveness and overall positive body image scale, respectively
Validity
            Its validity was estimated by computing correlations among the scores of the body appreciation, body effectiveness and overall positive body image, and the scores of physical quality of life, psychological quality of life, social relation quality of life, environmental quality of life and overall quality of life. In addition, the scores of body appreciation body effectiveness and overall positive body scale were correlated with the scores of and somatic, depression and overall general health.
The scores of body appreciation exhibited significant positive correlations with the scores of physical (r = .231, p = .000), psychological (r = .299, p = .000), social relation (r = .157, p = .010) and environmental (r = .226, p = .000) dimensions of quality of life of the male participants. Likewise, the scores of the female participants on body appreciation and the scores of physical (r = .290, p = .000), psychological (r = .411, p = .000), social relation (r = .175, p = .007) and environmental (r = .308, p = .000) aspects of quality of life also exhibited significant positive correlations. Similarly, the overall scores on this measure demonstrated significant positive correlations with the scores of physical (r = .235, p = .000), psychological (r = .336, p = .000), social relation (r = .174, p = .000) and environmental (r = .240, p = .000) aspects of quality of life.
The results showed that there were significant positive correlations among the scores of body effectiveness and the scores physical (r = .298, p = .000), psychological (r = .291, p = .000), social relation (r = .218, p = .000) and environmental (r = .196, p =.001) aspects of quality of life of the males. The same trend also got repeated in the case of females again where this dimension of positive body image showed significant positive correlations with scores of the physical (r = .374, p = .000), psychological (r = .303, p = .000), social relation (r = .188, p = .004) and environmental (r = .226, p =.000) aspects of quality of life. Similarly, significant positive correlations were also observed among the scores of body effectiveness and the scores of physical (r = .329, p = .000), psychological (r = .316, p = .000), social relation (r = .212, p =.000) and environmental (r = .218, p = .000) aspects of quality of life.
            The results showed that there were significant positive correlations among the scores of overall positive body image and the scores of physical (r = .300, p = .000), psychological (r = .329, p = .000), social relation (r = .213, p = .000) and environmental (r = .234, p = .000) aspects of quality of life of the males. The significant positive correlations among the scores of overall positive body image were also observed with the scores of physical (r = .374, p = .000), psychological (r = .303, p = .000), social relation (r = .188, p = .004) and environmental (r = .226, p = .000) aspects of quality of life of the females. Lastly, significant positive correlations among the scores of overall positive body image and the scores of physical (r = .329, p = .000), psychological (r = .316, p = .000), social relation (r = .212, p = .000) and environmental (r = .218, p = .000) dimensions of quality of life were observed for all the participants.
Contrarily, significant negative correlations were found among the scores of body appreciation and the scores of somatic (r = -.138, p = .024), depression (r = -.121, p = .048), general health (r = -.167, p = .006) of the male participants. For the females, the results showed similar trend as there were also significant negative correlations among the scores of body appreciation and the scores of depression (r = -.127, p = .05) and general health (r = -.191, p = .003) except somatic (r = -.119, p = .066). These values have been presented in Table 3.
TABLE 3 MAY BE PLACED HERE.
            The overall scores body image of the participants showed the same trend as these scores exhibited again significant negative correlations with the scores of somatic (r = -.140, p = .002), depression (r = .134, p = .004) and (r = .178, p = .000) general health. There were negative correlations among the scores of body effectiveness and the scores of somatic (r = -.018, p =.772), depression (r = -.028, p =.643) and general health (r = -.055, p =.369) of the males. For the female participants, non-significant negative correlations were also observed among the scores of body appreciation and the scores of somatic (r = -.036, p = .58), depression (r = -.043, p = .504) and (r = -.096, p = .138) general health. The same trend were observed for all the participants where non-significant negative correlations were again recorded for the scores of this measure and the scores of somatic (r = .045, p = .325), depression (r = .003, p = .947) and general health (r = .031, p = .508).
            The negative significant correlations were observed among the scores of positive body image and the scores of general health of the male (r = -.118, p = .054), female (r = -.156, p = .016) and all the participants (r = -.108, p = .019). The significant negative correlation was also recorded between the scores of positive body image and somatic (r = -.098, p = .033) dimension of the general health of all the participants. The scores of positive body image and the scores of somatic (r = -.081, p = .189) and depression (r = -.079, p = .200) of the males exhibited non-significant negative correlations. The same were also observed for scores of positive body image of the females and their scores on somatic (r = -.082, p = .205) and depression (r = -.091, p = .161) aspects of general health. Additionally, a non-significant negative correlation was observed between the scores of positive body image and depression (r = -.065, p = .158) of all the participants.

Discussion

The findings of Study 2 demonstrated that the two factors emerged after the factor analysis of the data of positive body image namely, body appreciation and body effectiveness with 11 and 13 items, respectively. Body appreciation reflected the respect, satisfaction, acceptance, positive feelings, attractiveness, self-enhancing effects and God-giftedness of body and its attributes. Similarly, body effectiveness denoted the effectiveness of body in achieving various life success and outcomes and helpful in achieving social praise, opportunities, positive feedback, identity as well as positive efforts. The coefficients of reliability of the two components and the entire scale were computed by Cronbach’s Alpha that indicated satisfactory levels of statistical significance. The coefficients of the validity of the scale were computed by computing the coefficients of correlations among the scores of two components and the overall positive body image and the scores of quality of life (World Health Organization, 1996) and the scores of general health questionnaire (Goldberg & Hillier, 1979; Parihar et al., 2019).  
The findings of study 2 showed that the scores of body appreciation, body effectiveness and overall positive body image exhibited significant positive correlations with the scores of physical, psychological, social relation and environmental dimensions of quality of life of the male and female participants. Irrespective of gender, the scores body appreciation, body effectiveness and overall positive body image demonstrated significant positive correlations with the scores of physical, psychological, social relation and environmental aspects of quality of life. Contrarily, significant negative correlations were found among the scores of body appreciation and the scores of somatic, depression, general health of the male and female participants except for somatic symptoms for females. These findings were also true when all the data of male and female participants on various measures were pooled. 
There were significant negative correlations among the scores of body appreciation and the scores of somatic symptoms, depression and general health of the male and female and all the participants except between the scores of body appreciation and somatic symptoms of the female participants for which a non-significant correlation was observed. The non-significant negative correlations were recorded among the scores of body effectiveness and the scores of somatic symptoms, depression and general health of the male and female and all the participants. Contrarily, the scores of overall positive body image, and the scores of somatic symptoms and depression of the male, female and all the participants except between the scores of overall positive body image and somatic symptoms of all the participants. The significant negative correlations were observed among the scores of overall positive body image and the scores of the general health of the male, female and all the participants. The findings evinced that positive body image has a significant role in shaping the quality of life and general health of the male and female participants.

General Discussion

Measurement of positive body image has been recognized as an important task before researchers (Webb et al., 2015). Several positive body image scales have been developed and the empirical evidence suggested that none of these tools was derived the attributes of positive body image using in-depth qualitative study. Therefore, it necessitated developing a comprehensive measure of positive body image. To this end, it was aimed to develop a scale on positive body image adopting the exploratory design. The findings of the first phase of the study facilitated to emerge four significant themes with a set of relevant attributes of positive body image. The findings of the qualitative study evinced that positive body image significantly shapes the nature of thoughts, memory and decision making of the participants of both the gender. Moreover, these perceptions of positive body image, in turn, structure many positive life outcomes such as self-confidence, success in life and social status. It was also evident that positive health practices such as yogic practices and meditation extend significant contributions in managing the nature and dynamics of positive body image. In addition, positive body image facilitate to participants of both the sexes to develop, maintain and enhance interpersonal and social relationships. Many descriptive attributes of positive body image have emerged in the first phase of the study that acted as the major background for preparing the items of the scale.
The findings of the first phase of the study also evinced the positive body image to be associated with many positive life outcomes. The findings of the present study have been mirrored in many previous studies that have suggested similar benefits of having a positive body image. For example, the researchers have suggested a positive body image to be significant to facilitate inner resources for optimizing health and well-being for all sorts of people (Cook-Cottone, 2013). The close association between body image and psychological well-being such as self-esteem, life-satisfaction and stress have also been observed (Peternel & Sujoldžić, 2009). Swami et al. (2013) have suggested that body image and subjective happiness are closely associated as body appreciation is a strong predictor of subjective happiness. Contrarily, a lower positive body image score may have negative consequences for the quality of life (Cash, 2008; Feingold & Mazzella, 1998; Garner, 1997).
            The major drives behind body image affecting human functioning are people’s desire to lose weight; look beautiful, healthy and energetic with productive and good performance. The positive body image and dissatisfaction have been reported to play an important role in the development of obesity, depression and psychological disturbances of various sorts. The perceptions of body image have been reported to be associated with obesity and depression (Chaiton et al., 2009). Moreover, positive body image has also been reported to be associated with other significant dimensions of human functioning in some Indian studies. For example, chronic health conditions (Pankaj Jain & Tiwari, 2016a; Tiwari & Kumar, 2015), women identity (Priya Jain, Tiwari, & Awasthi, 2018) and self-construal of adolescent girls (Priya Jain, Tiwari, Awasthi, et al., 2018) have been observed to be linked with positive body image.
            Moreover, the nature of body image perceptions has been reported to be linked with a number of healthy and unhealthy behaviours. It has been argued that higher positive body image may cause people to internalize positive health behaviours (Grogan, 2008) and engage in sports activities (Burgess et al., 2006; Choi, 2005). The differences in the mean scores of positive body image, quality of life and general health of the participants with neuroticism and extraversion can be explained in terms of differences in their basic cognitive, emotional and behavioural predispositions reported by previous researchers. It has been argued that dissimilarities in personality traits give birth to a difference in the patterns of affect, behaviour, cognition and desires (Ortony et al., 2005) and environmental responsivity (Corr, 2008; Revelle, 1995). These mentions evince that positive body image carries significant implications to understand a host of positive and negative outcomes of life.
The second phase of the study was conducted with the goal to develop and standardize a scale of positive body image for the Indian adults. The quantitative phase of the study led to emerging (Study 2) a scale comprising 24 items with two components: body appreciation (11 items) and body effectiveness (13 items). Body appreciation reflected the respect, satisfaction, acceptance, positive feelings, attractiveness, self-enhancing effects and God-giftedness of body and its attributes. Likewise, body effectiveness demonstrated the effectiveness of the body in achieving various life successes such as social praise, opportunities, positive feedback, identity and positive efforts. The findings also showed reliability coefficients to be satisfactory for the two components and overall scale. In addition, its validity was also satisfactory that was estimated by computing coefficients of correlation between the scores of the two components and the overall positive body image and the scores of general health questionnaire (Goldberg & Hillier, 1979) and quality of life (World Health Organization, 1996). It predictive strength was verified in a recent study employing the same measure of general health on Indian participants (Parihar et al., 2019).  

Implications and Limitations

            The findings of the study may have important theoretical and practical implications for the field of body image, school interventions, Psychology of adolescents and sportspersons and mental health interventions. In addition, the findings may also find their implications for promotive and preventive health purposes. The study has also been marred by some limitation like other scientific endeavours. For example, lack of diverse groups of participants, small sample for the qualitative study, participants from a single culture, only adult age group and a limited number of variables for quantitative phase of the study were some of the limitations of the study.

References

Avalos, L., Tylka, T. L., & Wood-Barcalow, N. (2005). The Body Appreciation Scale: Development and psychometric evaluation. Body Image, 2(3), 285–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2005.06.002
Bailey, K. A., Gammage, K. L., van Ingen, C., & Ditor, D. S. (2015). “It’s all about acceptance”: A qualitative study exploring a model of positive body image for people with spinal cord injury. Body Image, 15, 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2015.04.010
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brown, T. A., Cash, T. F., & Mikulka, P. J. (1990). Attitudinal Body-Image Assessment: Factor Analysis of the Body-Self Relations Questionnaire. Journal of Personality Assessment, 55(1–2), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.1990.9674053
Burgess, G., Grogan, S., & Burwitz, L. (2006). Effects of a 6-week aerobic dance intervention on body image and physical self-perceptions in adolescent girls. Body Image, 3(1), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2005.10.005
Cash, T. F. (2002). The situational inventory of body-image dysphoria: Psychometric evidence and development of a short form. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 32(3), 362–366. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.10100
Cash, T. F. (2008). The body image workbook: An eight-step program for learning to like your looks (2nd ed). New Harbinger Publications.
Cash, T. F., & Smolak, L. (Eds.). (2011). Body image: A handbook of science, practice, and prevention (2nd ed). Guilford Press.
Chaiton, M., Sabiston, C., O’Loughlin, J., McGrath, J. J., Maximova, K., & Lambert, M. (2009). A structural equation model relating adiposity, psychosocial indicators of body image and depressive symptoms among adolescents. International Journal of Obesity, 33(5), 588–596. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2009.43
Choi, P. Y. L. (2005). Femininity and the Physically Active Woman (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203977606
Cook-Cottone, C. P. (2013). Healthy eating in schools: Evidence-based interventions to help kids thrive (1st ed). American Psychological Association.
Corr, P. J. (2008). The reinforcement sensitivity theory. In P. J. Corr (Ed.), The reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality (First, pp. 347–376). Cambridge University Press.
Creswell, Clark, Gutmann, & Hanson. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 209–240). Thousand Oaks.
Creswell, J. W. (2004). Designing A Mixed Methods Study In Primary Care. The Annals of Family Medicine, 2(1), 7–12. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.104
Feingold, A., & Mazzella, R. (1998). Gender Differences in Body Image Are Increasing. Psychological Science, 9(3), 190–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00036
Franzoi, S. L., & Shields, S. A. (1984). The Body Esteem Scale: Multidimensional Structure and Sex Differences in a College Population. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48(2), 173–178. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4802_12
Frisén, A., & Holmqvist, K. (2010). What characterizes early adolescents with a positive body image? A qualitative investigation of Swedish girls and boys. Body Image, 7(3), 205–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2010.04.001
Garner, D. M. (1997). Body Image in America: Survey Results. Psychology Today. http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/199702/body-image-in-america-survey-results
Goldberg, D. P., & Hillier, V. F. (1979). A scaled version of the General Health Questionnaire. Psychological Medicine, 9(1), 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291700021644
Grogan, S. (2008). Body image: Understanding body dissatisfaction in men, women, and children (2nd ed). Routledge.
Halliwell, E. (2015). Future directions for positive body image research. Body Image, 14, 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2015.03.003
Holmqvist, K., & Frisén, A. (2012). “I bet they aren’t that perfect in reality:” Appearance ideals viewed from the perspective of adolescents with a positive body image. Body Image, 9(3), 388–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2012.03.007
Jain, Pankaj, & Tiwari, G. K. (2016a). Body image satisfaction and Life Satisfaction in HIV/AIDS patients. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 3(2, 1), 85–90. https://doi.org/10.25215/0302.010
Jain, Pankaj, & Tiwari, G. K. (2016b). Positive body image and general health: A Mixed Methods Study. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 4(1, 76), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.25215/0476.003
Jain, Priya, Tiwari, G. K., & Awasthi, I. (2018). Menstrual distress and attitude towards femininity of rural and urban adolescent girls. Madhya Bharti, 74, 222–233.
Jain, Priya, Tiwari, G. K., Awasthi, I., & Chaubey, A. (2018). Menstrual Experiences of Adolescent Girls: A Qualitative Study. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 6(1), 74–82. https://doi.org/10.25215/0601.087
Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A Measure of Subjective Happiness: Preliminary Reliability and Construct Validation. Social Indicators Research, 46(2), 137–155. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006824100041
Mendelson, B. K., Mendelson, M. J., & White, D. R. (2001). Body-Esteem Scale for Adolescents and Adults. Journal of Personality Assessment, 76(1), 90–106. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA7601_6
National Eating Disorder Association. (2018, February 18). Body Image. National Eating Disorders Association. https://www.nationaleatingdisorders.org/body-image-0
Ortony, A., Norman, D. A., & Revelle, W. (2005). Effective functioning: A three level model of affect, motivation, cognition, and behavior. In J. Fellous & M. Arbib (Eds.), Who needs emotions? The brain meets the machine (pp. 173–202). Oxford University Press.
Parihar, P., Pandey, R., Tiwari, G. K., Mishra, M., & Rai, P. K. (2019). Assessing the protective strengths of positive body image for somatic symptoms, anxiety, social dysfunction and depression. The European Journal of Counselling Psychology (under Review).
Peternel, L., & Sujoldžić, A. (2009). Adolescents Eating Behavior, Body Image and Psychological Well-Being. Collegium Antropologicum, 33(1), 205–212.
Revelle, W. (1995). Personality Processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 46(1), 295–328. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.46.020195.001455
Swami, V., Hadji-Michael, M., & Furnham, A. (2008). Personality and individual difference correlates of positive body image. Body Image, 5(3), 322–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2008.03.007
Swami, V., Tran, U. S., Brooks, L. H., Kanaan, L., Luesse, E.-M., Nader, I. W., Pietschnig, J., Stieger, S., & Voracek, M. (2013). Body image and personality: Associations between the Big Five Personality Factors, actual-ideal weight discrepancy, and body appreciation: Body Image and Personality. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 54(2), 146–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12014
Tiwari, G. K., & Kumar, S. (2015). Psychology and body image: A review. Shodh Prerak, 5(1), 1–9.
Tylka, T. L., & Wood-Barcalow, N. L. (2015). What is and what is not positive body image? Conceptual foundations and construct definition. Body Image, 14, 118–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2015.04.001
Tylka, Tracy L. (2013). Evidence for the Body Appreciation Scale’s measurement equivalence/invariance between U.S. college women and men. Body Image, 10(3), 415–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.02.006
Webb, J. B., Wood-Barcalow, N. L., & Tylka, T. L. (2015). Assessing positive body image: Contemporary approaches and future directions. Body Image, 14, 130–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2015.03.010
Wood-Barcalow, N. L., Tylka, T. L., & Augustus-Horvath, C. L. (2010a). “But I Like My Body”: Positive body image characteristics and a holistic model for young-adult women. Body Image, 7(2), 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2010.01.001
Wood-Barcalow, N. L., Tylka, T. L., & Augustus-Horvath, C. L. (2010b). “But I Like My Body”: Positive body image characteristics and a holistic model for young-adult women. Body Image, 7(2), 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2010.01.001
World Health Organization. (1996). WHOQOL-BREF: Introduction, administration, scoring and generic version of the assessment : field trial version, December 1996. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/63529
World Health Organization. (2016). Body mass index—BMI. World Health Organization. http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/disease-prevention/nutrition/a-healthy-lifestyle/body-mass-index-bmi