Response: commentary “the sexualized-body-inversion hypothesis revisited: valid indicator of sexual objectification or methodological artifact?β
We agree with Bernard et al.that the results of the degree of sexualization manipulation from Schmidt and Kistemaker restrict the generalizability of the SBIH but do not relate to target sexualization in the original study's stimuli. We agree with Bernard et al.that exact replication studies with sufficient statistical power are needed to elucidate the impact β