Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Research suggests that peer muscularity norms preferences are related to men’s body image, but little information is known about how perceptions of specific peer group norms preferences are related to men’s body image disturbances and specific health behaviors. This study investigated how men perceived the muscularity preferences of male, female, close, and distant peers and whether the perceptions of specific peer preferences were related to muscle dysmorphia and steroid use. Data on muscle dysmorphia and the perceptions of peer muscularity norms were collected from 117 male college students. Results indicated that men perceived distant and male peers as having the most exaggerated preferences for muscularity and that those perceptions were not an accurate reflection of their distant male peers’ reported preferences. Results also indicated that perceptions of close female peer muscularity preferences were predictive of symptoms of muscle dysmorphia, but this relationship did not exist for other peer groups, suggesting that the perceptions of close female peer preferences may play a role in the development of muscle dysmorphia. No relationship was found between perceptions of peer muscularity preferences and steroid use.

Keywords

drug use masculinity body image

Over the past several decades, the focus on men’s appearance and men’s muscularity has grown (Schooler & Ward, 2006). The increasing demand for men to achieve a muscular physique is reflected in the changing portrayal of masculinity in the media. Idealized male figures have been depicted in increasingly hypermuscular forms (Pope, Phillips, & Olivardia, 2000). For example, a study examining the male models in Playgirl magazine noticed that the bodies of male model centerfolds have changed over time, becoming denser and more muscular (Leit, Gray, & Pope, 2002). Law and Labre (2002) studied men’s depictions in GQ, Rolling Stone, and Sports Illustrated from 1967 to 1997 and reported that the men’s bodies portrayed in those magazines had become dramatically more lean and muscular over that 30-year period. In addition to messages from the media, young men report experiencing appearance-related pressure from the family and peers (M. K. Schaefer & Salafia, 2014). Studies of appearance-related teasing indicated that 44.7% of young men report being teased about their weight and appearance by family and peers (Liang, Jackson, & McKenzie, 2011). A study of men’s body-related conversations indicated that 25% of college men reported speaking with friends “frequently” about their bodies and their desire to be more muscular (Engeln, Sladek, & Waldron, 2013). Collectively, these findings suggest that men are facing increasing social pressures to achieve a more muscular ideal than in past decades.

Research on men’s body image suggests that body dissatisfaction is prevalent among men in a number of countries. A study of college-aged men in the United States, Ukraine, and Ghana identified that men in those three countries reported a desire to be more muscular, with over 90% of American college-aged men reporting a desire for greater muscularity (Frederick et al., 2007). Studies of adolescent boys in Fiji, Tonga, and Australia have reported a similar drive for muscularity (McCabe, Ricciardelli, Waqa, Goundar, & Fotu, 2009). In addition, a study of men in the United States, France, and Austria reported that men typically preferred a male figure that had an average of 28 additional pounds of muscle than their current frame (Pope et al., 2000). Taken together, these studies suggest that a high proportion of men are dissatisfied with their muscularity and that this dissatisfaction is widespread.

This growing body dissatisfaction is of concern because it has been linked to several negative emotional and behavioral outcomes. In particular, men who suffer from muscle dissatisfaction are more likely to suffer from muscle dysmorphia, a subcategory of body dysmorphic disorder in which people perceive their bodies as not being sufficiently muscular (American Psychiatric Association, 2013; Pope, Gruber, Choi, Olivardia, & Phillips, 1997). Originally coined in 1994 as “reverse anorexia,” muscle dysmorphia is a clinical disorder categorized by a preoccupation with building greater muscularity, an impairment in functioning, and a heightened concern that one is not muscular enough (Olivardia, 2001; Pope & Katz,1994). Muscle dysmorphia has become a growing concern among college-aged men where studies report increasing numbers of young men presenting at college counseling centers with symptoms of muscle dysmorphia (Davey & Bishop, 2006; Morgan, 2002). Muscle dysmorphia causes significant clinical distress and is linked with obsessive–compulsive disorder, substance abuse, social phobia, and depression (Grieve & Shacklette, 2012; Kelly, Dalrymple, Zimmerman & Phillips, 2013; K. A. Phillips et al., 2007).

Another negative consequence of men’s muscle dissatisfaction is the misuse of muscularity-enhancing drugs. Studies of men’s body image suggest that men are more frequently abusing these substances. For example, a study of 13- to 18-year-old boys in the United States reported that 9.8% reported a lifetime use of muscularity-enhancing drugs such as ephedrine, steroids, and prohormones (Cafri, van den Berg, & Thompson, 2006). An epidemiological study of high school students in the United States measured estimates of steroid and androstenedione, a precursor to anabolic steroids, to be at 8% among 12th graders in 2001 (Johnston, O’Malley, Bachman, & Schulenberg, 2010). Also, a recent study estimated that in 2013, 2.9 to 4.0 million American adults have at one point used steroids (Pope et al., 2014). Given the problems associated with negative body image, psychologists have been studying the causes of muscle dissatisfaction among men to prevent these problems from developing.

Body image researchers have highlighted the importance of studying societal messages about idealized bodies. Several theoretical models have been successfully applied to body image research such as the tripartite influence model (Thompson, Heinberg, & Tantleff, 1991) and self-discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1987). These models propose that people internalize these societal body ideals and use these internalized appearance standards when they are evaluating how they feel about their own bodies. Social comparison has also been identified as a central component of this process, whereby people compare themselves with other people as a way of evaluating themselves (Festinger, 1954). According to this theory, people who perceive themselves as falling short of these expectations then experience distress (Hargreaves & Tiggemann, 2009; Harrison, 2001; Martin & Govender, 2011). The research on men’s body image suggests that men’s body satisfaction is, in fact, influenced by the internalized body ideals that men use when comparing their appearance with others and that falling short in the comparison may lead to body-related distress (Cahill & Mussap, 2007; Hobza, Walker, Yakushko, & Peugh, 2007; Jones, 2004; Karazsia & Crowther, 2008, 2009, 2010; L. M. Schaefer & Thompson, 2014).

Researchers who have examined the specific targets men are most likely to use for comparison have suggested that men are more likely to compare themselves with their peers and friends, rather than same-gender family members or men in magazines (Karazsia & Crowther, 2009). Although peers have been identified as a common target for social comparison, questions remain about the differences between the specific peer groups that men may use as bodily comparisons. For example, men have a variety of peers who differ by gender and relationship proximity. A better understanding of how men perceive the muscularity preferences of their various peer groups would provide deeper understanding of the internalized standards men use when comparing themselves with their peers. It should be noted that research on social norms suggests that studying people’s perceptions of preferences can be more predictive of behavior than studying the true preferences, since most norms are often not explicitly stated and, therefore, people are likely acting on their own perceptions of those norms (Prinstein & Wang, 2005).

Understanding various reference group norms is particularly important because researchers have been developing normative feedback interventions that focus on providing people with accurate information tailored to the target individual. These tailored interventions have been identified to be an effective way of changing people’s perceived appearance norms (Mutterperl & Sanderson, 2002). Unfortunately, little is known about the specific peer groups that men use as comparisons. An examination of this would allow scientists and practitioners to better understand the muscularity standards that men internalize when they compare themselves with the standards of various peer groups. It would help determine if men perceive each peer group as having different standards. If men feel unique pressures from specific peer groups, then knowing those standards would be quite useful when developing normative feedback interventions for men with body image disturbances.

To fill this gap in the literature, the current study was designed to examine men’s perceptions of the muscularity preferences of various peer groups. More specifically, this study examined men’s perceptions of the muscularity preferences of their close, distant, male, and female peers. In addition, this study examined how these peer perceptions were related to symptoms of muscle dysmorphia and steroid use in men.

The few studies that have examined how men perceive their peers’ muscularity preferences have only examined men’s perceptions of cross-gender peer preferences of muscularity (Buss, Shackelford, Kirkpatrick, & Larsen, 2001). For example, Grossbard, Neighbors, and Larimer (2011) conducted a study of perceived muscularity preferences and reported that men overestimated the degree to which women find muscularity attractive. On average, men believed that women preferred male bodies that were significantly more muscular than what women had actually preferred. Similarly, men from Austria, France, and the United States believed that women were more attracted to males with an average of an extra 27 to 32 pounds of muscle; however, the women in the study rated men of average size for their particular country as being the most preferable (Pope et al., 2000). The findings from these studies suggest that men do not accurately perceive the muscularity preferences of women; they tend to overestimate the degree to which women find male muscularity attractive.

Although it is useful to examine the perceived muscularity preferences of cross-gender peers, no studies of men have examined the preferences of same-gender peers. Studies of women’s body image have indicated that women are influenced by their perceptions of the preferences of both same-gender and cross-gender peers and that women perceived their same-gender peers as preferring thinness more than their cross-gender peers (Lin, McCormack, Kruczkowski, & Berg, 2015). This study hopes to add to the literature by exploring how men perceive the muscularity preferences of their same-gender and cross-gender peers so that the perceptions of the two groups can be compared relative with each other. Based on previous research, it was hypothesized that men would perceive their same-gender peers as preferring muscularity more than their cross-gender peers.

In addition to examining perceptions of same-gender and cross-gender peer preferences, it may be useful to study peer groups that vary by relationship proximity. Research on the influence of close versus distant peer groups on women’s body image has indicated that women are more likely to perceive their distant peers as preferring thinness than their close peers (Lin et al., 2015). Although, it would be useful to understand how men’s perceptions of close and distant peers’ muscularity preferences influence men’s body image, no research has examined this. Based on this previous research, it was hypothesized that men would perceive distant peers as preferring muscularity more than close peers.

Finally, this study examined which peer-group perceptions were most closely related to negative outcomes, more specifically, muscle dysmorphia and steroid use. Social identity theory suggests that people are more influenced by the groups with which they most strongly identify (Ellemers & Haslam, 2012). Consistent with this, Lin et al. (2015) reported that women’s drive for thinness was most closely related to their perceptions of their close, same-gender peers’ appearance preferences. As such, it was hypothesized that men’s steroid use and levels of muscle dysmorphia would be more strongly related to the perceived muscularity preferences of their same-gender close peers than their cross-gender distant peers.

Research Question 1: How do men perceive the muscularity preferences of their male and female peers relative to each other?

Hypothesis 1: Men would perceive their male peers as preferring greater muscularity than their female peers.

Research Question 2: How do men perceive the muscularity preferences of their close and distant peers relative to each other?

Hypothesis 2: Men would perceive their distant peers as preferring greater muscularity than their close peers.

Research Question 3: Do men accurately perceive the muscularity preferences of their peers?

Given that only men were sampled in the study, the authors were able to access the accuracy of the estimates the participants had for male peers’ muscularity preferences only.

Hypothesis 3: Men would overestimate the muscularity preferences of other men.

Research Question 4: How are the perceived muscularity preferences of men’s peer groups related to symptoms of muscle dysmorphia?

Hypothesis 4: Muscle dysmorphia symptoms would be more positively related to the perceived preferences of close male peers than any other peer group.

Research Question 5: How are the perceived muscularity preferences of men’s peer groups related to steroid use?

Hypothesis 5: Steroid use would be more positively related to the perceived preferences of close male peers than any other peer group.

Method

Participants

The participants were 117 male college students from a small, coed, liberal arts college in the Northeastern United States. They ranged in age from 18 to 22 years (M = 19.89, SD = 1.17). The sample had an average body mass index of 25.06 (SD = 4.87). Due to institutional review board restrictions, data on the ethnic and racial backgrounds of the participants were extrapolated from the college’s demographic information for the entire student body (74% Caucasian/European Americans, 4% Black or African Americans, non-Hispanic/Latinos, 3% Asians, non-Hispanic/Latinos, 6% Hispanic/Latinos, 0.3% American Indians or Alaska Natives, non-Hispanic/Latino, 3% more than one race, and 11% did not identify).

Materials

Perceived Muscularity Preferences

This variable was measured using an alternate version of the Stunkard, Sorensen, and Schulsinger (1983) Figure Rating Scale adopted from Lynch and Zellner (1999). This scale consists of nine male figure drawings ranging from very thin to very muscular each with a number rating (e.g., 10, 20, 30, . . . 90). Participants were asked to identify the drawing that most closely matched their actual size and the preferred size for themselves (“Please indicate the number that represents the male figure that you actually look like/would ideally prefer to look like”) and were able to choose number between two figures (e.g., 65). To assess the accuracy of men’s perceptions of their peer’s muscularity preferences, an estimate was needed of the true muscularity preferences of the participants’ distant male peers. To obtain this estimate, the participants’ reported muscularity preferences was used as a measure of the true muscularity preferences of distant male peers since the study participants were a sample of distant male peers. The authors felt that the sample from the current study was an appropriate measure of distant male peers because the sample was recruited broadly from the general campus population by using the college’s Facebook webpage, in addition to 20 different introductory psychology classes over the course of four semesters. To assess participants’ perceptions of male peer preferences, the question asked “Please indicate the number that represents the male figure that the typical man at this college would most prefer.” The question was repeated a total of 4 times, each time inserting a new peer group as the target of the sentence (distant male peers = “the typical man at this college”; close male peers = “your close male friends”; distant female peers = “the typical woman at this college”; close female peers = “close female friends”). Muscularity preferences for close, distant, male, and female peers were determined by calculating the average scores between two relevant groups (e.g., the perception of “close peer preferences” was determined by calculating the average between “close male peers” and “close female peers.”

Muscle Dysmorphia

The Muscle Appearance Satisfaction Scale (Mayville, Williamson, White, Netemeyer, & Drab, 2002) was administered to participants in order to determine symptoms of muscle dysmorphia. It is a 19-item questionnaire that presents statements such as “My self-worth is very focused on how my muscles look,” “I would try anything to get my muscles to grow,” and “I must get bigger muscles by any means necessary.” Participants rate their agreement to each statement on a 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) scale. Scores were calculated by reverse coding any negatively worded items and then averaging the ratings. As was reported in the original scale validation, the Muscle Appearance Satisfaction Scale produced good test–retest reliability (r = .87), good internal consistency (α = .82), and convergent validity with other measures of men’s body image such as the Body Building Dependence Scale and the Social Physique Anxiety Scale. Alpha from the present study was .84.

Steroid Use

Participants were also asked about steroid use. More specifically, participants were asked to rate how frequently they use steroids and how often they thought other college men use steroids on a 6-point Likert-type scale from 0 (never) to 5 (every day).

Demographic Information

Information was collected on age, gender, height, and weight that were used to calculate body mass index.

Procedure

The study was approved by the institutional review board at the college prior to data collection. Participants in this study were recruited both through a Facebook announcement directed at male students at the college and through the psychology participant pool where students enrolled in introductory psychology and research methods courses are able to participate in research studies over the course of 2 years. The study was advertised as a study of men’s health attitudes. Participants read the consent form online and once they agreed to participate, participants were able to complete the muscularity preference ratings, then the rating of muscle dysmorphia, and the rating of steroid use. Finally, they were presented with a debriefing form explaining the nature of the study. The study took participants approximately 10 minutes to complete. Participants from the psychology participant pool were compensated for 1 credit hour of their research requirement.

Results

Means and standard deviations were calculated and are listed in Table 1. The first hypothesis was that men would perceive their male peers as preferring greater muscularity than women. The second hypothesis was that men would perceive their distant peers as preferring greater muscularity than close peers. To test both these hypotheses, a Gender (male, female) × Proximity (close, distant) repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted. Results indicated that there was a main effect for the gender of the peer group, F(1,112) = 7.44, p = .007, .002, η²_p = .093, such that the perceived muscularity preferences of men were significantly higher (M = 62.50, SD = 0.98, 95% CI [60.87, 64.30]) than perceived muscularity preferences of women (M = 60.09, SD = 0.88, 95% CI [58.13, 61.86]). There was also a main effect for the proximity of the peer group, F(1,112) =11.45, p =.001, η²_p = .062, such that the perceived muscularity preferences of close peers were significantly lower (M = 60.00, SD = 0.94, 95% CI [58.37, 61.84]) than perceived muscularity preferences of distant peers (M = 62.59, SD = 0.87, 95% CI [60.56, 64.73]). The interaction effect was not significant, F(1,112) = 0.24, p = .623, η²_p = .002 (see Figure 1). The results of this analysis indicated support for both the first and second hypotheses.

Table 1.

Means and Standard Deviations for All Variables (N = 117).

Variable	M	SD	Range
Age	19.89	1.17	18-22
Actual muscularity	47.09	13.13	10-90
Men’s reported preferred muscularity	57.82	11.60	30-80
Muscle Appearance Satisfaction Scale	2.80	0.87	1.16-4.63
Steroid use	1.03	0.03	1-4
Men’s perception of peer muscularity preferences
Perception of male peer preferences	62.37	10.40	35-90
Perception of female peer preferences	60.09	9.40	30-75
Perception of close peer preferences	60.00	10.01	35-80
Perception of distant peer preferences	62.59	9.20	30-80
Perception of distant male peer preferences	63.78	11.48	30-90
Perception of close male peer preferences	60.95	13.18	30-90
Perception of distant female peer preferences	61.19	10.90	30-80
Perception of close female peer preferences	58.98	10.07	30-75

The third hypothesis was that men would overestimate the muscularity preferences of other men. To test whether men overestimated the muscularity preferences of their peers, perceptions of their peers were compared with that peer group’s true preferences. Since the current sample consisted only of men, the authors could only test how accurate the participants’ perceptions were of distant male peers’ preferences but not of any other peer groups. As a measure of distant male peers’ reported muscularity preferences, the current sample’s reported muscularity preferences were used since the participants represent a sample of distant male peers at the college. A dependent measures t test was conducted comparing the perception of distant male peers’ muscularity preferences (M = 63.98, SD = 11.48, CI₉₅ [61.66, 65.90]) and the true preferences of those distant male peers (M = 57.87, SD = 11.53, CI₉₅ [55.70, 65.90]) from the current sample. Results indicated that participants significantly overestimated the muscularity preferences of distant male peers, t(114) = −4.59, p < .001, d = 512. The results of this analysis provide support for the third hypothesis.

The fourth hypothesis was that the perceived muscularity preferences of close male peers would be more closely related to symptoms of muscle dysmorphia than any other peer group. To test this hypothesis, a Pearson correlation was conducted between symptoms of muscle dysmorphia and the perceived muscularity preferences of the four peer groups (close male, close female, distant male, and distant female). There was a significant relationship between muscle dysmorphia and the perceived preferences of close female and close male peers (Table 2). To compare the strength of the correlations between close female peers (r = .42) and close male peers (r = .22), a Steiger’s Z test was performed, indicating that the correlation was significantly different (Z = 2.23, p = .03). Given that the participants’ muscularity preferences are so highly correlated with the perceived muscularity preferences of their close female and close male peers (r = .56 for both peer groups), a hierarchical linear regression was conducted to control for the effects of the participants’ own muscularity preferences as well as the relative correlation between the perceived preferences of each peer group. In addition, the effects of age and weight were controlled for because researchers have suggested that age and weight influence men’s body image (Peat, Peyerl, Ferraro, & Butler, 2011; N. Phillips & de Man, 2010). The effects of the participants’ own muscularity preferences, age, and weight were controlled for by entering those terms on the first step. Then the perceived muscularity preferences of distant male, close male, distant female, and close female peers were entered in the second step. Tests of multicollinearity were conducted and indicated that multicollinearity was not a concern (Table 3). The results indicated that after controlling for participants’ own muscularity preferences, the perceived muscularity preferences of close female peers were related to muscle dysmorphia (β = .28, t = 2.88, p = .005), such that men who perceived their close female peers as preferring greater muscularity were more likely to suffer from greater symptoms of muscle dysmorphia. However, the perceived muscularity preferences of distant male peers were not related to muscle dysmorphia. The model that included close male and close female peer preferences was a better fit than age, weight, and participant’s own muscularity preferences alone to explain the variance in muscle dysmorphia (R² change = .058, F(2, 98) = 4.55, p = .013). The close male and close female peer regression coefficients were significantly different, Z = 3.35, p < .001. Given that results indicated that the perception of the muscularity preferences of close female friends is most closely related to symptoms of muscle dysmorphia, the fourth hypothesis was not supported.

Table 2.

Correlations Between All Major Variables.

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1. Muscle Appearance Satisfaction Scale	—
2. Steroid use	−.07	—
3. Actual muscularity	.33***	.02	—
4. Preferred muscularity	.53***	−.07	.44***	—
5. Perceived preferences of distant male peers	−.09	−.03	.20*	.28**	—
6. Perceived preferences of close male peers	.22*	−.08	.26**	.56***	.42***	—
7. Perceived preferences of distant female peers	.17	−.10	.17	.42***	.36***	.52***	—
8. Perceived preferences of close female peers	.42***	−.09	.20*	.56***	.29**	.47***	.61***	—

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Table 3.

Hierarchical Linear Regression Analysis Predicting Muscle Dysmorphia From the Perception of Close Male and Close Female Peer Muscularity Preferences While Controlling for the Participants’ Own Muscularity Preferences, Age, and Weight (N = 117).

Predictor	R ²	Β	Standard error	β	p	Tolerance	Variance inflation factor
Step 1	.32
Age		−.15	.06	−.20	.020	.99	1.01
Weight		−.00	.00	−.07	.403	.95	1.05
Preferred muscularity		.04	.01	.56	.000	.95	1.05
Step 2	.38
Close male peers		−.01	.01	−.15	.151	.64	1.56
Close female peers		.02	.01	.28	.005	.67	1.50

Note. Preferred muscularity = participant’s own muscularity preferences; close male peers = perception of the male muscularity preferred by close male peers; close female peers = perception of the male muscularity preferred by close female peers.

Figure 1.

Men’s perceptions of the muscularity preferences of peer groups.

The fifth hypothesis was that the perceived muscularity preferences of close male peers would be more closely related to steroid use than any other peer group. To test this hypothesis, a Pearson correlation was run between steroid use and the perceived muscularity preferences of close male, close female, distant male, and distant female peers. Results indicated no significant correlations between steroid use and any perception of peer preferences (see Table 2). Therefore, the fifth hypothesis was not supported.

Discussion

The goals of this study were to examine men’s perceptions of male, female, close, and distant peer muscularity preferences. In addition, this study examined whether the perceived muscularity preferences of specific peer groups were related to negative outcomes in men. The finding that men are perceived to value muscularity more than women suggests that men perceived different muscularity standards from male and female peers. Based on these findings, men are more likely to view their male peers as having higher standards for muscularity than female peers and, therefore, may be more likely to feel inadequate when comparing their bodies with the muscularity preferences of their male peers. This finding is consistent with research on women’s body image that suggested women perceive their same-gender peers as preferring thinness more than their cross-gender peers (Lin et al., 2015). It may be that people are more likely to perceive their same-gender peers as having stronger preferences for idealized gender-specific appearance characteristics (i.e., muscularity in men, thinness in women).

It is noteworthy that men perceived other men as preferring greater male muscularity than women prefer. It may be that men are receiving more extreme messages about the role of muscularity as a central component of male identity from their male peers than their female peers, and therefore, men are more likely to perceive their male peers as preferring a more developed muscularity for themselves that exceeds the preferences of women. This may be a reflection of the different messages about male muscularity expressed to male and female audiences. Media aimed at male audiences (e.g., action movies, video games, men’s magazines) tend to show male characters with hyperdeveloped muscularity in the idealized male lead, whereas media developed for a female audience show male characters with less developed muscularity. For example, Frederick, Fessler, and Haselton (2005) conducted a study of the images of male beauty in magazines aimed at men (e.g., Men’s Health) and women (e.g., Cosmopolitan), and identified that the male images in men’s magazines were much more muscular than the male images in women’s magazines. It may be that men are receiving stronger messages about the role of muscularity in male attractiveness that are then being internalized.

It was also hypothesized that men would perceive distant peers as preferring muscularity more than close peers. Consistent with this hypothesis, the current study indicated that distant peers were perceived as preferring greater levels of muscularity compared with close peers. Men perceive groups to which they identify least as having the greatest preference for muscularity, whereas groups to which they have greater identification are perceived as having lower preferences for muscularity. This suggests that when men are using distant comparison groups as a reference group (e.g., American college students), they are using higher standards for muscularity than when comparing themselves with closer groups (e.g., close friends). These results are similar to the results seen in studies of women’s body image, where women perceived their distant peers as preferring thinness more than their close peers (Lin et al., 2015).The finding that people perceive distant peers as engaging in more stereotyped behavior than their close peers is consistent with the literature on the ways in which people perceive in-groups and out-groups. Research on in-group/out-group perceptions have suggested that people are more likely to perceive out-group members as more similar to each other, whereas they perceive in-group members as being more varied (Rubin & Badea, 2012; Simon & Brown, 2000; Tajfel, 2010). It may be that people are more likely to assign greater endorsement of stereotyped beliefs to distant peers since they are less identified with distant peers, whereas people are more likely to have frequent meaningful interactions with their close friends that help buffer the more extreme messages about hypermuscularity assigned to distant peers.

The third hypothesis was that men would misperceive the muscularity preferences of their distant male peers. Consistent with the hypothesis, the current results indicated that men overestimated the degree to which their distant male peers preferred muscularity. This finding is consistent with previous literature that has suggested that men typically overestimate the muscularity preferences of their female peers (Grossbard et al., 2011; Pope et al., 2000). This study extends those findings by suggesting that men similarly overestimate the muscularity preferences of their distant male peers as well.

The finding that men misperceive the muscularity preferences held by both their male and female peers may be informed by the literature on pluralistic ignorance. Pluralistic ignorance refers to a situation where people misperceive the support their peers have for a behavior (Miller & McFarland, 1987). This can happen when the most common views expressed publically do not reflect the views that most people hold privately. In the case of men’s muscularity preferences, the prevalent images of the masculine ideal displayed predominantly in the media show hypermuscular men. These images are so prevalent that men may be using these media messages to inform their beliefs of the muscularity preferences of their male peers. Since they are overestimating their peers’ preferences, then it is likely that men feel unnecessary pressure to attain a higher level of muscularity than is preferred by their peers.

The fourth hypothesis of the study was to examine how the perceived muscularity preferences of men’s peers were related to symptoms of muscle dysmorphia. Contrary to the fourth hypothesis, it was reported that men who perceived their close female peers as preferring greater muscularity were more likely to suffer from symptoms of muscle dysmorphia. Although men’s own muscularity preferences were correlated with their perceptions of peer preferences, the relationship between the perceptions of close female peer preferences and muscle dysmorphia existed even after controlling for men’s own muscularity preferences, age, and weight. This suggests that in addition to men’s own muscularity preferences, age, and weight, men who perceive their close female peers as preferring greater muscularity are at greater risk for muscle dysmorphia. This is the first evidence that muscle dysmorphia is related to the perception of peer muscularity preferences.

This finding is consistent with previous literature on the effect of close friends versus distant peers on body image. This suggests that the perception of close female peer muscularity preferences influence muscle dysmorphia in men in ways that other peer groups do not. Although sexual orientation was not explicitly measured in this study, for heterosexual men, it may be that close female peers include girlfriends or potential romantic partners, and therefore the strength of these relationships refer to men’s body image being strongly influenced by the opinions of their romantic partners. This finding would be consistent with previous research that has identified the opinions of female romantic partners to be a strong influence on the body image of heterosexual men (Boyes, Fletcher, & Latner, 2007). This suggests that interventions focused on reducing body image concerns in men should focus their attention on men’s perception of the muscularity preferences of their close female peers and perhaps, current or potential romantic partners.

Interestingly, the results indicated that muscle dysmorphia symptoms are not related to perceptions of close male, distant female, and distant male peers. Given the literature on the importance of close peers in body image outcomes (Jones, 2012; M. K. Schaefer & Salafia, 2014), it was expected that close peer preferences have a stronger impact on body image as than distant peer preferences. However, previous research on women’s body-related distress suggests that women’s close same-gender peers have a stronger influence on drive for thinness than their close cross-gender peers (Lin et al., 2015), which was not identified in this study. This suggests that different peer groups may have different impacts on men and women’s body-related distress; women may be more strongly influenced by close same-gender peers. Whereas men may be more strongly influenced by close cross-gender peers.

Contrary to the fifth hypothesis, perceptions of peer muscularity preferences were not related to steroid use. Although it may be that steroid use may not be linked with the perception of peer preferences, the findings may also be a result of a sampling limitation. It may be that so few participants reported having used steroids that the range of steroid use was too restricted to result in any significant findings. If the participants had reported a greater range of steroid use, variability in the data could have facilitated the detection of a relationship should one have existed. In addition, participants may have been reluctant to admit steroid use because of stigma associated with an illegal activity. It would have been interesting to examine whether assessing attitudes toward steroid use might have produced a different result and asking participants to report actual steroid use.

The results of this study build on and extend the previous research in the area of men’s body image. Previous research had suggested that men misperceive the muscularity preferences of female peers (Grossbard et al., 2011; Pope et al., 2000). This study extended those findings by identifying that (a) men perceive male peers as having a stronger preference for muscularity than female peers, (b) men perceive distant peers as preferring muscularity than their close peers, (c) the perceptions that men have of the muscularity preferences of distant male peers are inaccurate, and (d) men who perceive their close female peers as preferring a more muscular male form are more likely to exhibit symptoms of muscle dysmorphia. Taken together, this study suggests that men perceive their various peer groups as having different muscularity expectations and that it is important to examine which specific peer groups men are using as a comparison. This study also suggests that men who are using their male peers as the primary comparison group are more likely to use unrealistically high muscularity standards that most men in actuality do not hold. In addition, this study also indicates that men who perceived their close female peers as preferring greater male muscularity are more likely to report signs of muscle dysmorphia.

Based on the results of this study, men’s body-related interventions should be designed to more specifically focus on the peer comparisons that men use when evaluating their bodies. Since men are using peer preferences to help assess their own bodies, and these preferences are being misperceived, interventions focused on correcting these misperceptions could be helpful in reducing men’s symptoms of muscle dysmorphia. In particular, this study suggests that men’s perceptions of close female peer-group preferences are incredibly influential in men’s body image. Focusing interventions on those peer groups may be more effective than focusing on general peer norms.

Although the results of this study suggest a number of interesting findings, the results should be interpreted with caution. The sample of men was small (N = 117) and recruited from a small liberal arts college in the Northeastern United States with a predominantly White, college-educated, 18- to 22-year-old, primarily heterosexual student body and therefore was not representative of all men. It is assumed that the data more accurately reflect the perceptions of college-aged, college-educated, White, heterosexual men. The lack of data on race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation prevented the analysis on racial, ethnic, and sexual orientation differences. In addition, directionality cannot be determined in this study because it was correlational in nature. Although it is possible that perceiving one’s peers as preferring greater male muscularity may cause muscle dysmorphia in men, it may be that muscle dysmorphia causes men to misperceive the muscularity standards of their peers. In addition, the question about steroid use was direct, which may have resulted in response bias. Given that steroid use is an illegal behavior, participants may have been reluctant to report any previous use. To extend the findings of this study, future research should recruit a more diverse sample to be able to examine various demographic differences on muscularity perceptions. It may be that perceptions of muscularity preferences may differ based on variables such as education, sexual orientation, age, race, and ethnicity. Future studies may want to include a more subtle measure of steroid use, rather than using a single-item question to measure steroid use. In addition, future studies could also examine peer norms and muscle dysmorphia longitudinally to get a better sense of causality.

In summary, the results of this study suggest that the perceptions of peer muscularity preferences have a meaningful impact on men’s body image and that the perceptions about preferences of close female peers are related to muscle dysmorphia. Interventions designed to prevent men’s body image concerns should pay attention to the muscularity preferences men perceive for their close female peers in an effort to correct any misperceptions. Given the growing concern of muscle dysmorphia and body image disturbances among men, it is of increasing importance to study the causes of body dissatisfaction among men in an effort to reduce these problems.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Boyes

A. D.

Fletcher

G. O.

Latner

J. D.

(2007). Male and female body image and dieting in the context of intimate relationships. Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 764-768. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.21.4.764

Buss

D. M.

Shackelford

T. K.

Kirkpatrick

L. A.

Larsen

R. J.

(2001). A half century of mate preferences: The cultural evolution of values. Journal Of Marriage And Family, 63(2), 491-503. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00491.x

Cafri

van den Berg

Thompson

J. K.

(2006). Pursuit of muscularity in adolescent boys: Relations among biopsychosocial variables and clinical outcomes. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 35, 283-291.

Cahill

Mussap

A. J.

(2007). Emotional reactions following exposure to idealized bodies predict unhealthy body change attitudes and behaviors in women and men. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 62, 631-639. doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2006.11.001

Carlson Jones

. (2004). Body Image Among Adolescent Girls and Boys: A Longitudinal Study. Developmental Psycho-logy, 40(5), 823-835. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.40.5.823

Davey

C. M.

Bishop

J. B.

(2006). Muscle dysmorphia among men: An emerging gender-related counseling concern. Journal of College Counseling, 9, 171-180.

Ellemers

Haslam

(2012). Social identity theory. In Van Lange

P. M.

Kruglanski

A. W.

Higgins

(Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 379-398). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Engeln

Sladek

M. R.

Waldron

(2013). Body talk among college men: Content, correlates, and effects. Body Image, 10, 300-308. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.02.001

10.

Festinger

(1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.

11.

Frederick

D. A.

Buchanan

G. M.

Sadehgi-Azar

Peplau

L. A.

Haselton

M. G.

Berezovskaya

(2007). Desiring the muscular ideal: Men’s body satisfaction in the United States, Ukraine, and Ghana. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 8, 103-117.

12.

Frederick

D. A.

Fessler

D. M.

Haselton

M. G.

(2005). Do representations of male muscularity differ in men’s and women’s magazines?. Body Image, 2(1), 81-86. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.12.002

13.

Grieve

F. G.

Shacklette

M. D.

(2012). Brief report on men’s bodies and mood: Correlates between depressive symptoms and muscle dysmorphia symptoms. North American Journal of Psychology, 14, 563-568.

14.

Grossbard

J. R.

Neighbors

Larimer

M. E.

(2011). Perceived norms for thinness and muscularity among college students: What do men and women really want? Eating Behaviors, 12, 192-199.

15.

Hargreaves

D. A.

Tiggemann

(2009). Muscular ideal media images and men’s body image: Social comparison processing and individual vulnerability. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 10, 109-119. doi:10.1037/a0014691

16.

Harrison

(2001). Ourselves, our bodies: Thin-ideal media, self-discrepancies, and eating disorder symptomatology in adolescents. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 20, 289-323.

17.

Higgins

E. T.

(1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319-340.

18.

Hobza

C. L.

Walker

K. E.

Yakushko

Peugh

J. L.

(2007). What about men? Social comparison and the effects of media images on body and self-esteem. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 8, 161-172. doi:10.1037/1524-9220.8.3.161

19.

Johnston

L. D.

O’Malley

P. M.

Bachman

J. G.

Schulenberg

J. E.

(2010). Monitoring the future: National survey results on drug use, 1975-2009 (Vol. I: Secondary school students, NIH Publication No. 10-7584). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.

20.

Jones

D. C.

(2012). Body image: Peer influences. In Cash

T. F.

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of body image and human appearance (Vol. 1, pp. 257-263). San Diego, CA: Elsevier. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-384925-0.00042-0

21.

Karazsia

B. T.

Crowther

J. H.

(2008). Psychological and behavioral correlates of the SATAQ-3 with males. Body Image, 5, 109-115. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2007.08.004

22.

Karazsia

B. T.

Crowther

J. H.

(2009). Social body comparison and internalization: Mediators of social influences on men’s drive for muscularity. Body Image, 6, 105-112.

23.

Karazsia

B. T.

Crowther

J. H.

(2010). Sociocultural and psychological links to men’s engagement in risky body change behaviors. Sex Roles, 63, 747-756.

24.

Kelly

M. M.

Dalrymple

Zimmerman

Phillips

K. A.

(2013). A comparison study of body dysmorphic disorder versus social phobia. Psychiatry Research, 205, 109-116. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2012.08.009

25.

Law

Labre

M. P.

(2002). Cultural standards of attractiveness: A thirty-year look at changes in male images in magazines. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 79, 697-711.

26.

Leit

R. A.

Gray

J. J.

Pope

H. G.

Jr. (2002). The media’s representation of the ideal male body: A cause for muscle dysmorphia? International Journal of Eating Disorders, 31, 334-338.

27.

Liang

V. X.

Jackson

A. C.

McKenzie

V. L.

(2011). The effects of teasing in childhood or adolescence on young adults’ body image. The Australian Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 28, 101-115. doi:10.1375/aedp.28.2.101

28.

Lin

McCormack

Kruczkowski

Berg

M. B.

(2015). How women’s perceptions of peer weight preferences are related to drive for thinness. Sex Roles, 72, 117-126. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0446-4

29.

Lynch

S. M.

Zellner

D. A.

(1999). Figure preferences in two generations of men: The use of figure drawings illustrating differences in muscle mass. Sex Roles, 40, 833-843.

30.

Martin

Govender

(2011). “Making muscle junkies”: Investigating traditional masculine ideology, body image discrepancy, and the pursuit of muscularity in adolescent males. International Journal of Men’s Health, 10, 220-239.

31.

Mayville

S. B.

Williamson

D. A.

White

M. A.

Netemeyer

R. G.

Drab

D. L.

(2002). Development of the Muscle Appearance Satisfaction Scale: A self-report measure for the assessment of muscle dysmorphia symptoms. Assessment, 9, 351-360.

32.

McCabe

M. P.

Ricciardelli

Waqa

Goundar

Fotu

(2009). Body image and body change strategies among adolescent males and females from Fiji, Tonga and Australia. Body Image, 6, 299-303.

33.

Miller

D. T.

McFarland

(1987). Pluralistic ignorance: When similarity is interpreted as dissimilarity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 298-305.

34.

Morgan

(2002). The men in the mirror. Chronicle of Higher Education, 49(5), A53-A54.

35.

Mutterperl

J. A.

Sanderson

C. A.

(2002). Mind over matter: Internalization of the thinness norm as a moderator of responsiveness to norm misperception education in college women. Health Psychology, 21, 519-523.

36.

Neighbors

LaBrie

J. W.

Hummer

J. F.

Lewis

M. A.

Lee

C. M.

Desai

. . . Kilmer

J. R.

(2010). Group identification as a moderator of the relationship between perceived social norms and alcohol consumption. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 24, 522-528.

37.

Olivardia

(2001). Mirror, mirror on the wall, who’s the largest of them all? The features and phenomenology of muscle dysmorphia. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 9, 254-259.

38.

Peat

C. M.

Peyerl

N. L.

Ferraro

F. R.

Butler

(2011). Age and body image in Caucasian men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 12, 195-200. doi:10.1037/a0021478

39.

Phillips

K. A.

Pinto

Menard

Eisen

J. L.

Mancebo

Rasmussen

S. A.

(2007). Obsessive–compulsive disorder versus body dysmorphic disorder: A comparison study of two possibly related disorders. Depression and Anxiety, 24, 399-409. doi:10.1002/da.20232

40.

Phillips

de Man

A. F.

(2010). Weight status and body image satisfaction in adult men and women. North American Journal of Psychology, 12, 171-184.

41.

Pope

Phillips

K. A.

Olivardia

(2000). The Adonis complex: The secret crisis of male body obsession. New York, NY: Free Press.

42.

Pope

H. G.

Jr. Gruber

A. J.

Choi

Olivardia

Phillips

K. A.

(1997). Muscle dysmorphia: An underrecognized form of body dysmorphic disorder. Psychosomatics, 38, 548-557.

43.

Pope

H. G.

Jr. Gruber

A. J.

Mangweth

Bureau

deCol

Jouvent

(2000). Body image perception among men in three countries. American Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 1297-1301.

44.

Pope

H. G.

Jr. Kanayama

Athey

Ryan

Hudson

J. I.

Baggish

(2014). The lifetime prevalence of anabolic-androgenic steroid use and dependence in Americans: Current best estimates. American Journal on Addictions, 23, 371-377. doi:10.1111/j.1521-0391.2013.12118.x

45.

Prinstein

M. J.

Wang

S. S.

(2005). False consensus and adolescent peer contagion: Examining discrepancies between perceptions and actual reported levels of friends’ deviant and health risk behaviors. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 293-306.

46.

Rubin

Badea

(2012). They’re all the same!. . . but for several different reasons: A review of the multicausal nature of perceived group variability. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 367-372. doi:10.1177/0963721412457363

47.

Schaefer

L. M.

Thompson

J. K.

(2014). The development and validation of the Physical Appearance Comparison Scale-Revised (PACS-R). Eating Behaviors, 15, 209-217. doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2014.01.001

48.

Schaefer

M. K.

Salafia

E. B.

(2014). The connection of teasing by parents, siblings, and peers with girls’ body dissatisfaction and boys’ drive for muscularity: The role of social comparison as a mediator. Eating Behaviors, 15, 599-608. doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2014.08.018

49.

Schooler

Ward

L. M.

(2006). Average Joes: Men’s relationships with media, real bodies, and sexuality. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 7, 27-41.

50.

Simon

Brown

(2000). Perceived intragroup homogeneity in minority–majority contexts. In Stangor

(Ed.), Stereotypes and prejudice: Essential readings (pp. 326-337). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

51.

Stunkard

A. J.

Sorensen

Schulsinger

(1983). Use of the Danish Adoption Register for the study of obesity and thinness. In Kety

S. S.

Rowland

L. P.

Sidman

R. L.

Matthysse

S. W.

(Eds.), Genetics of neurological and psychiatric disorders (pp. 115-120). New York, NY: Raven Press.

52.

Tajfel

(2010). Social stereotypes and social groups. In Postmes

Branscombe

N. R.

(Eds.), Rediscovering social identity (pp. 191-206). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

53.

Thompson

J. K.

Heinberg

L. J.

Tantleff

(1991). The physical appearance comparison scales (PACS). The Behavior Therapist, 14, 174.

Muscle Dysmorphia and the Perception of Men’s Peer Muscularity Preferences

Abstract

Keywords

Method

Participants

Materials

Perceived Muscularity Preferences

Muscle Dysmorphia

Steroid Use

Demographic Information

Procedure

Results

Discussion

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

References