MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790027742 · doi:10.1037/men0000149

Relative strength of the associations of body fat, muscularity, height, and penis size dissatisfaction with psychological quality of life impairment among sexual minority men.

2018· article· en· W2790027742 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Scott Griffiths, Stuart B. Murray, Deborah Mitchison, David Castle, Jonathan Mond

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology of Men & Masculinity · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCilagH. Lundbeck A/SAllerGenHospiraRochePfizer
KeywordsPsychologyPenisQuality of life (healthcare)Psychological well-beingClinical psychologyQuality (philosophy)DemographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To date, there is scant research on whether different domains of male body dissatisfaction vary in the strengthof their relationships with psychological well-being. This paucity also extends to sexual minority men (i.e.,men who report their sexual orientation as gay or bisexual). Thus, among sexual minority men, we examinedthe relative strength of the associations of four key male body dissatisfaction domains body fat, muscularity,height, and penis sizewith psychological quality of life impairment. A geographically representative sampleof 2,733 sexual minority men completed a self-report survey, which was advertised nationwide acrossAustralia and New Zealand to users of a popular geosocial-networking smartphone application. Participantscompleted a measure of psychological quality of life in addition to measures of body fat, muscularity, height,and penis size dissatisfaction. Results indicated that increased dissatisfaction with each domain of male bodydissatisfaction was uniquely associated with psychological quality of life impairment. The strongest relationshipwith quality of life impairment was observed for muscularity dissatisfaction (effect size small tomedium), followed by dissatisfaction with body fat (small), height (small), and penis size (very small). Theserelationships were not moderated by participants sexual orientation (exclusively gay vs. bisexual), culturalbackground, or relationship status. The findings emphasize the need to prioritize research on muscularitydissatisfaction and related psychopathology, a category inclusive of muscularity-oriented disordered eating,muscle dysmorphia, and anabolic steroid misuse and dependence. Contrary to common disparaging stereotypesabout men and their body image concerns, penis dissatisfaction was relatively uncommon and evidencedthe weakest association with quality of life impairment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology of Men & MasculinitySame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207