Men's psychobiological responses to, and recovery from, a social-evaluative body image threat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Negative body image is common in young men and related to many harmful outcomes. Often, negative body image results from social-evaluative threats. Social self-preservation theory (SSPT) suggests that social-evaluative threats elicit psychobiological (e.g., shame and cortisol) and behavioural responses (e.g., submission). Exercise is a long-term coping strategy for negative body image and can reduce psychobiological responses to social-evaluative threats unrelated to the body (e.g., giving a speech to a panel of judges). The present study investigated the psychobiological and behavioural responses to, and recovery from, a social-evaluative body image threat in university men, and whether weight training moderated the expected psychobiological responses. University men (n = 69; mean age = 20.8 years, SD = 1.84; mean BMI = 25.25 kg/m2, SD = 3.23) were randomly assigned to a high-threat or low-threat condition. Results showed that men in the high-threat condition had greater levels of post-threat body dissatisfaction, body shame, social physique anxiety, and cortisol compared to men in the low-threat condition after controlling for pre-threat scores, body fat percentage and trait body image. At the recovery time point (approximately 50 minutes after the onset of the threat) there were no longer significant differences between conditions. Participants in the high-threat condition also exhibited shame-relevant behaviours to a greater extent than men in the low-threat condition. Weight training did not moderate any of the psychobiological responses. These findings are consistent with SSPT and suggest that men respond to, and recover from, social-evaluative body image threats relatively quickly.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".