Muscle up: Examining psychological responses to social-evaluative body image threat in male athletes and non-athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social self-preservation theory (SSPT) holds that humans have an innate need to protect their social-self, which is comprised of their social status, standing, and esteem. Humans respond to negative social-evaluative threats, in which the potential for loss of social status is present, with increased feelings of shame. Body dissatisfaction and shame often occur as a result of negative social evaluation of the physique. Athletes generally report less body dissatisfaction and shame compared to non-athletes, however, no studies have examined these body image responses to acute social-evaluative body image threat conditions. Therefore, the present study looked to examine psychological responses to social-evaluative body image threats in 49 male varsity athletes and 63 non-athletes between the ages of 18 and 28 years. Participants were randomized into a high or low body image threat condition, stratified by athletic status, and measures of body dissatisfaction and shame were taken across the session. Results revealed significant time-by-condition interactions, such that both athletes and non-athletes had significant increases in body shame (F[2.43, 321] = 4.56, p = .007) and dissatisfaction (F[2.22, 318] = 3.21, p = .038), controlling for percent body fat and trait body image, following the high threat condition. Participants in the low threat condition experienced significant decreases in body shame and no changes in body dissatisfaction, regardless of athletic status. Consistent with SSPT but contrary to previous body image research involving male athletes, these findings suggest that acute social-evaluative body threat affects men equally, regardless of athletic status.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".