Influence of Societal Factors on Female Body Image
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Influence of Societal Factors on Female Body Image
surveys. BMJ 337, a494 (2008). 41. Monteath, S. A. & McCabe, M. P. The influence of societal factors on female body image. J. Soc. Psychol. 137, 708–727 (1997). 42. Ralph-Nearman, C. et al. A novel mobile tool (Somatomap) to assess body image perception pilot tested with fashion models
and nonmodels: Cross-sectional study. JMIR Ment. Health 6, e14115 (2019). 43. Robinson, E. & Kersbergen, I. Overweight or about right? A norm comparison explanation of perceived weight status. Obes.
Sci. Pract. 3, 36–43 (2017). 44. Cornelissen, K. K., McCarty, K., Cornelissen, P. L. & Tovée, M. J. Body size estimation in women with anorexia nervosa and
healthy controls using 3D avatars. Sci. Rep. 7, 15773 (2017). 45. Heider, N., Spruyt, A. & De Houwer, J. Implicit beliefs about ideal body image predict body image dissatisfaction. Front. Psychol.
6, 1402 (2015). 46. Cooper, P. J. & Taylor, M. J. Body image disturbance in bulimia nervosa. Br. J. Psychiatry 153, 32–36 (1988). 47. Higgins, E. T. Self‑Discrepancy Theory: What Patterns of Self‑Beliefs Cause People to Suffer? (eds. Berkowitz, L. B. T.-A. in E. S.
P.) Vol. 22 93–136 (Academic Press, 1989). 48. Williamson, D. A., Gleaves, D. H., Watkins, P. C. & Schlundt, D. G. Validation of self-ideal body size discrepancy as a measure
of body dissatisfaction. J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 15, 57–68 (1993). 49. Strauman, T. J., Vookles, J., Berenstein, V., Chaiken, S. & Higgins, E. T. Self-discrepancies and vulnerability to body dissatisfac-
tion and disordered eating. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 61, 946–956 (1991). 50. Mölbert, S. C. et al. Assessing body image in anorexia nervosa using biometric self-avatars in virtual reality: Attitudinal com-
ponents rather than visual body size estimation are distorted. Psychol. Med. 48, 642–653 (2018). 51. Kosslyn, S. M. Mental images and the brain. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 22, 333–347 (2005). 52. Preston, C. & Ehrsson, H. H. Illusory changes in body size modulate body satisfaction in a way that is related to non-clinical
eating disorder psychopathology. PLoS One 9, e85773 (2014). 53. Cattarin, J. A., Thompson, J. K., Thomas, C. & Williams, R. Body image, mood, and televised images of attractiveness: The role
of social comparison. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 19, 220–239 (2000). 54. Winkler, C. & Rhodes, G. Perceptual adaptation affects attractiveness of female bodies. Br. J. Psychol. 96, 141–154 (2005). 55. Ambroziak, K. B., Azañón, E. & Longo, M. R. Body size adaptation alters perception of test stimuli, not internal body image.
Front. Psychol. 10, 2598 (2019). 56. Mele, S., Cazzato, V. & Urgesi, C. The importance of perceptual experience in the esthetic appreciation of the body. PLoS One 8
(2013). 57. Garner, D. M. & Garfinkel, P. E. Socio-cultural factors in the development of anorexia nervosa. Psychol. Med. 10, 647–656 (1980). 58. Friston, K. The free-energy principle: A unified brain theory?. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 11, 127–138 (2010). 59. Friston, K. J., Daunizeau, J., Kilner, J. & Kiebel, S. J. Action and behavior: A free-energy formulation. Biol. Cybern. 102, 227–260
(2010). 60. Friston, K. et al. The anatomy of choice: active inference and agency. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7, 598 (2013). 61. De Coster, L. et al. Perceived match between own and observed models’ bodies: Influence of face, viewpoints, and body size.
Sci. Rep. 10, 13991 (2020). 62. Kim, J. & Forsythe, S. Adoption of virtual try-on technology for online apparel shopping. J. Interact. Mark. 22, 45–59 (2008).
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientific Reports | (2021) 11:14451 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93865-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
- Ducheneaut, N., Wen, M.-H., Yee, N. & Wadley, G. Body and mind: A study of avatar personalization in three virtual worlds. in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 1151–1160. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1145/ 15187 01. 15188 77 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2009).
- Bellard, A. M., Cornelissen, P. L., Mian, E. & Cazzato, V. The ageing body: contributing attitudinal factors towards perceptual body size estimates in younger and middle-aged women. Arch. Womens. Ment. Health https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s00737- 020- 01046-8 (2020).
- Chauvin, A., Worsley, K. J., Schyns, P. G., Arguin, M. & Gosselin, F. Accurate statistical tests for smooth classification images. J. Vis. 5, 1 (2005).
- Blais, C. et al. Facial features underlying the decoding of pain expressions. J. Pain 20, 728–738 (2019). 67. Cornelissen, K. K., Cornelissen, P. L., Hancock, P. J. B. & Tovée, M. J. Fixation patterns, not clinical diagnosis, predict body size
over-estimation in eating disordered women and healthy controls. Int. J. Eat. Disord. 49, 507–518 (2016). 68. Irvine, K. R. et al. The visual cues that drive the self-assessment of body size: Dissociation between fixation patterns and the key
areas of the body for accurate judgement. Body Image 29, 31–46 (2019). 69. Dotsch, R. rcicr: Reverse correlation image classification toolbox. (2016). 70. Cazzato, V., Mian, E., Serino, A., Mele, S. & Urgesi, C. Distinct contributions of extrastriate body area and temporoparietal
junction in perceiving one’s own and others’ body. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 15, 211–228 (2015). 71. Linkenauger, S. A., Kirby, L. R., Mcculloch, K. C. & Longo, M. R. People watching: The perception of the relative body propor-
tions of the self and others. Cortex 92, S372–S379 (2017). 72. Cornelissen, P. L., Johns, A. & Tovée, M. J. Body size over-estimation in women with anorexia nervosa is not qualitatively dif-
ferent from female controls. Body Image 10, 103–111 (2013). 73. Linkenauger, S. A., Ramenzoni, V. & Proffitt, D. R. Illusory shrinkage and growth: body-based rescaling affects the perception
of size. Psychol. Sci. 21, 1318–1325 (2010). 74. Ogawa, N., Narumi, T. & Hirose, M. Distortion in perceived size and body-based scaling in virtual environments. in Proceedings
of the 8th Augmented Human International Conference. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1145/ 30411 64. 30412 04 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2017).
- van der Hoort, B., Guterstam, A. & Ehrsson, H. H. Being barbie: The size of one’s own body determines the perceived size of the world. PLoS One 6, e20195 (2011).
- Banakou, D., Groten, R. & Slater, M. Illusory ownership of a virtual child body causes overestimation of object sizes and implicit attitude changes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 110, 12846 LP–12851 (2013).
- Tajadura-Jiménez, A., Banakou, D., Bianchi-Berthouze, N. & Slater, M. Embodiment in a child-like talking virtual body influ- ences object size perception, self-identification, and subsequent real speaking. Sci. Rep. 7, 9637 (2017).
- Longo, M. R., Azañón, E. & Haggard, P. More than skin deep: Body representation beyond primary somatosensory cortex. Neuropsychologia 48, 655–668 (2010).
- Schwarzlose, R. F., Baker, C. I. & Kanwisher, N. Separate face and body selectivity on the fusiform gyrus. J. Neurosci. 25, 11055 LP–11059 (2005).
- Downing, P. E., Jiang, Y., Shuman, M. & Kanwisher, N. A cortical area selective for visual processing of the human body. Science (80‑. ). 293, 2470 LP–2473 (2001).
- Downing, P. E. & Peelen, M. V. Body selectivity in occipitotemporal cortex: Causal evidence. Neuropsychologia 83, 138–148 (2016).
- Peelen, M. V. & Downing, P. E. Selectivity for the human body in the fusiform gyrus. J. Neurophysiol. 93, 603–608 (2005). 83. Peelen, M. V. & Downing, P. E. The neural basis of visual body perception. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 8, 636–648 (2007). 84. Vocks, S. et al. Differential neuronal responses to the self and others in the extrastriate body area and the fusiform body area.
Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 10, 422–429 (2010). 85. Limanowski, J. & Blankenburg, F. That’s not quite me: Limb ownership encoding in the brain. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 11,
1130–1140 (2016). 86. Northoff, G. & Bermpohl, F. Cortical midline structures and the self. Trends Cogn. Sci. 8, 102–107 (2004). 87. Burke, S. M. et al. Sex differences in own and other body perception. Hum. Brain Mapp. 40, 474–488 (2019). 88. Piryankova, I. V et al. Owning an overweight or underweight body: distinguishing the physical, experienced and virtual body.
PLoS One 9, e103428 (2014). 89. Piryankova, I. V et al. Can I recognize my body’s weight? The influence of shape and texture on the perception of self. ACM
Trans. Appl. Percept. 11 (2014). 90. Nimcharoen, C., Zollmann, S., Collins, J. & Regenbrecht, H. Is that me?—Embodiment and body perception with an augmented
reality mirror. in 2018 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality Adjunct (ISMAR‑Adjunct) 158–163. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1109/ ISMAR- Adjun ct. 2018. 00057 (2018).
- Thaler, A. et al. Perception of others’ body sizes is predicted by own body size. J. Vis. 17, 843 (2017). 92. Calvo-Merino, B., Glaser, D. E., Grèzes, J., Passingham, R. E. & Haggard, P. Action observation and acquired motor skills: An
fMRI study with expert dancers. Cereb. Cortex 15, 1243–1249 (2005). 93. Decety, J. The neurophysiological basis of motor imagery. Behav. Brain Res. 77, 45–52 (1996). 94. Naito, E. et al. Internally simulated movement sensations during motor imagery activate cortical motor areas and the cerebellum.
- Neurosci. 22, 3683 LP–3691 (2002). 95. Neyret, S., Bellido Rivas, A. I., Navarro, X. & Slater, M. Which body would you like to have? The impact of embodied perspective
on body perception and body evaluation in immersive virtual reality. Front. Robot. AI 7, 31 (2020). 96. Thaler, A., Geuss, M. N. & Mohler, B. J. The role of visual information in body size estimation. Iperception. 9, 2041669518796853
(2018). 97. Preston, C. & Ehrsson, H. H. Illusory obesity triggers body dissatisfaction responses in the insula and anterior cingulate cortex.
Cereb. Cortex 26, 4450–4460 (2016). 98. Allen, M. S. & Walter, E. E. Personality and body image: A systematic review. Body Image 19, 79–88 (2016). 99. Allen, M. S. & Robson, D. A. Personality and body dissatisfaction: An updated systematic review with meta-analysis. Body Image
33, 77–89 (2020). 100. Glashouwer, K. A., Bennik, E. C., de Jong, P. J. & Spruyt, A. Implicit measures of actual versus ideal body image: Relations with
self-reported body dissatisfaction and dieting behaviors. Cognit. Ther. Res. 42, 622–635 (2018). 101. Irvine, K. R. et al. Distorted body image influences body schema in individuals with negative bodily attitudes. Neuropsychologia
122, 38–50 (2019). 102. Wignall, S. J., Thomas, N. A. & Nicholls, M. E. R. Fat or fiction? Effects of body size, eating pathology, and sex upon the body
schema of an undergraduate population. Body Image 23, 135–145 (2017). 103. Keizer, A. et al. Too fat to fit through the door: First evidence for disturbed body-scaled action in anorexia nervosa during
locomotion. PLoS ONE 8, 1–7 (2013). 104. Metral, M. et al. Painfully thin but locked inside a fatter body: Abnormalities in both anticipation and execution of action in
anorexia nervosa. BMC Res. Notes 7, 707 (2014). 105. Glashouwer, K. A., Meulman, C. & de Jong, P. J. Negative body image is not related to spontaneous body-scaled motoric behavior
in undergraduate women. Front. Psychol. 10, 580 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518877
https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518877
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00737-020-01046-8
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00737-020-01046-8
https://doi.org/10.1145/3041164.3041204
https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR-Adjunct.2018.00057
14
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientific Reports | (2021) 11:14451 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93865-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
- Cass, J., Giltrap, G. & Talbot, D. Female body dissatisfaction and attentional bias to body images evaluated using visual search. Front. Psychol. 10, 2821 (2020).
- Luo, P. et al. Gender differences in affective sharing and self-other distinction during empathic neural responses to others’ sad- ness. Brain Imaging Behav. 9, 312–322 (2014).
- Misener, K. & Libben, M. Examination of the relationship between attentional biases and body dissatisfaction: An eye-tracking study. Cognit. Ther. Res. 44, 581–595 (2020).
- Keizer, A., van Elburg, A., Helms, R. & Dijkerman, H. C. A Virtual reality full body illusion improves body image disturbance in anorexia nervosa. PLoS One 11, e0163921 (2016).
- Ryan, A. S. & Nicklas, B. J. Age-related changes in fat deposition in mid-thigh muscle in women: Relationships with metabolic cardiovascular disease risk factors. Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. J. Int. Assoc. Study Obes. 23, 126–132 (1999).
- JASP Team. JASP (Version 0.12.2) (Computer Software). (2020). 112. He, J., Sun, S., Zickgraf, H. F., Lin, Z. & Fan, X. Meta-analysis of gender differences in body appreciation. Body Image 33, 90–100
(2020). 113. Alemany, S. et al. Anthropometric survey of the Spanish female population aimed at the apparel industry. Int. Conf. 3D Body
Scan. Technol. (2010). 114. Loper, M., Mahmood, N., Romero, J., Pons-Moll, G. & Black, M. J. SMPL: A skinned multi-person linear model. ACM Trans.
Graph. 34 (2015). 115. Autodesk, I. Maya. (2019). 116. Mendelson, B. K. et al. Body-esteem scale for adolescents and adults body-esteem scale for adolescents and adults. 3891 (2010). 117. Benet-Martínez, V. & John, O. P. Los Cinco Grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait-multimethod analyses of the
big five in Spanish and English. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 75, 729–750 (1998). 118. Botella García del Cid, L., Ribas Rabert, E. & Ruiz, J. B. Evaluación Psicométrica de la Imagen Corporal: Validación de la versión
española del multidimensional body self relations questionnaire (MBSRQ). Rev. Argentina Clín. Psicol. XVIII, 253–264 (2009). 119. Anwyl-Irvine, A. L., Massonnié, J., Flitton, A., Kirkham, N. & Evershed, J. K. Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioral experi-
ment builder. Behav. Res. Methods 52, 388–407 (2020). 120. Wichmann, F. A. & Hill, N. J. The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fit. Percept. Psychophys. 63,
1293–1313 (2001). 121. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. (2020). 122. Wagenmakers, E.-J. et al. Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: Theoretical advantages and practical ramifications. Psychon.
Bull. Rev. 25, 35–57 (2018) 123. Bellard, A. M., Cornelissen, P. L., Mian, E. & Cazzato, V. The ageing body: Contributing attitudinal factors towards perceptual
body size estimates in younger and middle-aged women. Arch. Womens. Ment. Health 24, 93–105 (2021). 124. Rosen, J. C. & Ramirez, E. A comparison of eating disorders and body dysmorphic disorder on body image and psychological
adjustment. J. Psychosom. Res. 44, 441–449 (1998). 125. Hrabosky, J. I. et al. Multidimensional body image comparisons among patients with eating disorders, body dysmorphic disorder,
and clinical controls: A multisite study. Body Image 6, 155–163 (2009). 126. Toh, W. L., Grace, S. A., Rossell, S. L., Castle, D. J. & Phillipou, A. Body parts of clinical concern in anorexia nervosa versus
body dysmorphic disorder: A cross-diagnostic comparison. Aust. Psychiatry Bull. R. Aust. New Zeal. Coll. Psychiatr. 28, 134–139 (2020).
Acknowledgements LDC was supported by Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades Juan de la Cierva-Incorporación Grant IJC2018-038347-I and the CONEX-Plus programme funded by Universidad Carlos III de Madrid and the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 801538. ATJ was supported by Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad of Spain Ramón y Cajal Grant RYC-2014-15421. This research was partly funded by the Spanish Agencia Estatal de Investigación (PID2019-105579RB-I00/AEI/10.13039/501100011033). The authors would like to thank Martin Mojica-Benavides for his help in preparing the psychometric curve analyses.
Author contributions L.D.C.: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Visualization, Writing— original draft. P.S.H.: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing—review & editing. J.L.M.: Conceptualization, Writing—review & editing. A.T.J.: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Writing—review & editing.
Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ s41598- 021- 93865-7.
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to L.D.C.
Reprints and permissions information is available at www.nature.com/reprints.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93865-7
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93865-7
15
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientific Reports | (2021) 11:14451 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93865-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or
format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/.
© The Author(s) 2021
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Scientific Reports is a copyright of Springer, 2021. All Rights Reserved.
Use of a real-life practical context changes the relationship between implicit body representations and real body measurements
Results
Correlations between real and perceived hip width.
Psychological traits.
Diagnostic areas.
Discussion
Conclusion
Material and methods
Participants.
Stimuli and apparatus.
Psychological traits questionnaires.
Body esteem scale for adolescents and adults (BESAA).
Big 5 Inventory-10 (BFI-10).
Body satisfaction.
Procedure.
Data analysis.
Correlations between real and perceived hip width.
Psychological traits.
Diagnostic areas.
References
Acknowledgements
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!