{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02619515389652914, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010478061558611657, 'mean_word_length': 4.945525291828794, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Physical Self-Concept. What does it mean to be Old: What does it mean to be Young?

2 Does the concept of physical self remain stable across age? Or does the concept of physical self change as the body wearies and changes in shape? Do the components emphasised in our evaluation of our physical selves change with age or remain stable? Without evaluating such questions it is inappropriate to talk about Physical Self-Concept as though it is the same thing, with just different scores, for the elderly and for the young. This research evaluates the Physical Self-Concept of two distinctly different groups, the elderly (over 60 years of age) and a group of young people (aged 11-15 years). It also evaluates the relative importance of the various dimensions of Physical Self-Concept. Data were collected in Sydney, Australia, using the Physical Self-Concept Scale (Richards, 1987), from volunteer older people (average age 69 years) and a representative group of high school students (average age 13.5years). Internal reliabilities and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were used to determine if the instrument was suitable in terms of reliability and factorial structure for each of the groups. Sound psychometric properties were found for the Richards Physical Self Concept Instrument across age and gender. Analyses showed factor scores are differentiated by sex and by age for some factors. Remarkable similarities and only some significant differences were found for older and younger and also male and female groups.