Muscles on Instagram:
How Exposure to Fitspiration Affects Body Dissatisfaction in Young Male Adults and the Roles of Muscular Ideal Internalization and Body Comparison Type
Loïs Neugebauer, 11261773
Master’s Thesis - Persuasive Communication
University of Amsterdam - Graduate School of Communication Word count: 7439
Supervisor: Sanne Schinkel June 25th, 2020
Abstract
Male muscular ideals have long been present in the media. With the rise of the fitspiration trend, its reach has expanded to social media, and Instagram in particular. Fitspiration posts depict ‘ideally’ fit bodies, intended to inspire its viewers. However, the posts also seem to affect some in a negative manner. While the effects of fitspiration have been studied amongst female samples, its effects remain largely unstudied amongst men. Fitspiration on Instagram poses the threat of normalization of the muscular ideal and negative affect when this ideal is not met. Especially considering that younger generations, which make up the most active group of Instagram users, are relatively vulnerable to opinions and behaviors of others. This study ought to clarify the relationship of exposure to fitspiration on Instagram on body dissatisfaction, while taking into account the possible influence of body comparison type and muscular ideal internalization. An online experiment was conducted amongst 133 men aged 18 to 30 years old. Results imply that exposure to fitspiration on Instagram does not influence young male adults’ body dissatisfaction. An effect was found from exposure to fitspiration on body comparison type, suggesting that young male adults who viewed the fitspiration post tend to look up to the muscular male in the post, in terms of attractiveness and muscularity. This relationship was moderated by their level of muscular ideal internalization. Men who viewed the fitspiration post, regardless of their level of muscular ideal internalization, showed upward comparison to the male depicted in the post. When shown the non-fitspiration post, men high in muscular ideal internalization engaged in downward comparison. For those low in muscular ideal internalization, the non-fitspiration post did not trigger upward- nor downward comparison. Interestingly, body comparison type in turn did not influence body dissatisfaction. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.
Introduction
Over the years, the media have regularly depicted masculinity as muscularity (Moss, 2012). Especially in advertising, muscular men are often seen promoting perfumes, clothes, and it seems to sell (Hobza & Rochlen, 2009; Syrjälä & Leipämaa-Leskinen, 2018). As a result of this emphasis placed on muscles, the male muscular ideal has turned into the preferred body shape of many men (Frederick, Fessler, & Haselton, 2005; Karazsia, Murnen, & Tylka, 2017; Talbot, Cass, & Smith, 2020). Muscular bodies seem to have become normal. While we base our perceptions of reality on our own experiences, the media also largely guide these perceptions (Hoffman & Glynn, 2013; Thompson & Heinberg, 1999). Overemphasis of muscular males in the media can incite muscularity to become the norm (McNeill & Firman, 2014). In reality however, behind the muscles lie years of training and strict diets, and perhaps even some Photoshop. Studies imply that viewing images of such muscular men in advertisements leads men to feel dissatisfied with their own body (Blond, 2008). There seems to be a gap between the muscular ideal and reality.
Surpassing traditional media, social media have become an integral part of many people’s lives and is often used to stay up to date with the newest trends and other users’ day-to-day lives. Consequently, the image of the ideal male body has also expanded toward the online environment. For example, to Instagram; the social media platform especially of preference amongst younger audiences (Chen, 2020). With over a billion active users each month, Instagram is often used as a means to share aspects of the users’ day-to-day life. A relatively recent trend on the platform shows a great example of the expansion of the muscular ideal to the online environment: fitspiration. Fitspiration posts are fitness-related images, depicting ‘ideally’ fit bodies (Boepple & Thompson, 2015). The images tend to show muscular men and toned women, with bodies that they have likely spent years on building. These images are often described to be of inspirational nature, encouraging others to work for a fit body like
the sender has (Carrotte, Prichard, & Lim, 2017; Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2016). To date, a search on Instagram for ‘#fitspiration’, or ‘#fitspo’, the latter being a shortened term, results in over 89 million posts. As Instagram is used to share images of day-to-day life, posts of fit bodies can give the feeling that these are more common and normal than they truly are (Hargreaves & Tiggemann, 2003). Exposure to fitspiration on Instagram amongst men is expected to show comparable effects on body dissatisfaction as traditional media, and perhaps even stronger. That is, because the same muscular ideal is being shown, but in a more personally relevant context reflective of peers’ day-to-day life, as opposed to distant models in advertising (Carey, Donaghue, & Broderick, 2014). Images like these are especially more likely to pose a threat to the personal development of the younger generations active on Instagram, as their susceptibility to opinions and behavior of others is more apparent than in older age groups (Callan, Kim, & Matthews, 2015). Not living up to these, largely oversimplified, fitspiration goals can result in unnecessary negative affect, for example towards their own bodies.
Such findings show from studies focusing on the online fitspiration trend amongst women. These imply increased body dissatisfaction after viewing such idealized images on social media compared to viewing a set of control images (Robinson et al., 2017; Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2015). However, the causal effects from viewing fitspiration on Instagram on body dissatisfaction have not yet been studied for men. This is problematic, as one third of this type of imagery on social media portrays to male bodies (Carrotte et al., 2017). Thirty-one percent of Instagram users are male (Chen, 2020). Men are thus likely to be exposed to fitspiration posts at some point, while it is unknown what effects this can have on them. Learning more about this relationship among males is important, as body dissatisfaction in men has been found to be closely related to eating disorders, low self-esteem, using performance-enhancing drugs, depression, and muscle dysmorphia (Grieve, 2007; Olivardia, Pope, Borowiecki, & Cohane, 2004).
A relevant concept related to body dissatisfaction after seeing fitspiration, which is often seen as explanatory, is social comparison (Fardouly, Willburger, & Vartanian, 2017; Robinson et al., 2017; Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2015). The concept of social comparison is grounded in Social Comparison Theory, which states that people evaluate themselves based on how they compare to others (Festinger, 1954). This appears to be activated when people view muscular bodies reflective of the muscular ideal, leading people to see themselves as less attractive after viewing others’ near-perfect and idealized bodies (Robinson et al., 2017; Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2015). This comparison is expected to be even more apparent when men strongly internalize this muscular ideal. Ideal internalization refers to the acceptance of a socially emphasized ideal as one’s own ideal, thus striving to live up to it (Thompson & Stice, 2001). This idea about an interaction between exposure to fitspiration and muscular ideal internalization on the comparison being made is grounded in research suggesting that people tend to compare themselves more to people who possess features desirable to them (Karazsia & Crowther, 2009; Krayer, Ingledew, & Iphofen, 2007). Both of these factors should thus be taken into account when studying the effect of exposure to fitspiration on body dissatisfaction. This study is unique in that it aims to measure the causal effects of viewing fitspiration on Instagram amongst young male adults. Existing research focused on the causal effects of fitspiration has primarily been done in women (Robinson et al., 2017; Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2015), while men have only been subject to such studies in a traditional media context (Blond, 2008; Hobza & Rochlen, 2009; Leit et al., 2002). Clarification of the possible influence of exposure to fitspiration on Instagram on body dissatisfaction in men can help to understand and counter its potentially negative effects. If these are established, it might be useful to look into the implementation of disclosures to be posted alongside fitspiration posts. This way, the risks that come with increased body dissatisfaction, like developing eating disorders, depression or muscle dysmorphia, can be minimized. While such results of body dissatisfaction have been
widely studied, the antecedents of body dissatisfaction remain vague. Therefore, the current study aims to answer the following question:
‘‘What is the effect of exposure to fitspiration on Instagram on young male adults’ body dissatisfaction and to what extent is this effect influenced by body comparison type and muscular ideal internalization?’’
Theoretical framework
Body dissatisfaction is a broad concept portraying to many aspects of the body. Over time, two overarching dimensions have been identified in particular, with the salience of both differing between women and men (Karazsia et al., 2017). While for women, thinness seems to be an especially important dimension of body dissatisfaction, it has been largely emphasized that, for men, muscularity is the most important aspect of body dissatisfaction (Hargreaves & Tiggemann, 2009; Karazsia et al., 2017; Leit et al., 2002; McNeill & Firman, 2014; Tiggemann et al., 2007). Surely, there are multiple levels of muscularity to be differentiated. Nonetheless, not all studies focused on muscularity seem to differentiate between these. Pertaining to these levels, Arbour and Martin Ginis (2006) studied the effects of exposure to magazine images depicting muscular men on body dissatisfaction amongst men. Herein, the researchers used two different levels of muscularity. The first set of images showed hyper-muscular men, with bodybuilder-like physiques. The second set of images showed moderately muscular men, with toned but not extremely muscular physiques. The images of the moderately muscular men induced more body dissatisfaction than the images of the hyper-muscular men, suggesting that the desired level of muscularity portrays more to the socially desirable aspect of muscularity, rather than extensive muscle-mass in itself.
Several studies have looked into the effect of exposure to images portraying muscularity in traditional media on body dissatisfaction in men. A meta-analysis of literature on the effects of exposure to images of muscular men in magazines and advertisements on body dissatisfaction has been done by Blond (2008). All 15 included studies were experimental studies. Results from this meta-analysis show that, overall, there was a small but negative significant effect of viewing images of muscular men on body dissatisfaction. After exposure to the images of muscular men, men were more dissatisfied with their bodies than those who were not exposed to the images of muscular men. Control groups differed between the included studies and showed for example showed ads depicting non-muscular men or ads for cars with no men depicted at all.
Other studies showed similar results regarding muscular male models in traditional advertising (Hobza & Rochlen, 2009; Leit et al., 2002). In both studies, male college students were either exposed to a range of advertisements with a focus on muscular bodies or control images. After exposure, Leit et al. (2002) asked participants to rank their current muscularity and what their preferred muscularity would look like. Men that were shown images of muscular male bodies showed a higher discrepancy between their current and preferred levels of muscularity, compared to men in the control group, who saw images of average male bodies. Hobza and Rochlen, (2009) evaluated general body dissatisfaction based on self-report scale items. Consistent with the findings by Leit et al. (2002), they also found that those exposed to ads portraying muscular men experienced an increase in body dissatisfaction, whereas this did not occur in the control group that was exposed to ads with no men depicted in them. Results thus seem consistent over a range of studies focused on traditional media, suggesting a significant effect of exposure to images of muscular men on body dissatisfaction amongst college men.
Such studies have also been done regarding fitspiration on social media amongst female samples. Fitspiration posts focused on women tends to show toned and slender female bodies. Still, these studies show similar findings as research focused on muscular ideal advertising amongst men. Exposure to fitspiration was found to be positively correlated with higher body dissatisfaction in a self-report survey study (Fardouly, Willburger, & Vartanian, 2017) and support has even found for a causal relationship (Robinson et al., 2017; Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2015). Tiggemann and Zaccardo (2015) established this relationship through an experiment where they exposed female students to Instagram posts. These posts were either a range of fitspiration images, or travel images of which a few also depicted random people. Those exposed to the fitspiration images showed an increase in body dissatisfaction from pre- to post-test, whereas those exposed to the travel images actually showed a slight decrease. Robinson et al. (2017) also conducted an experiment, wherein female students were assigned to images portraying either the female thin ideal, athletic ideal, or muscular ideal. Exposure to thin- and athletic ideal images caused an increase in body dissatisfaction amongst women. These two ideals seem to be more appealing to women than the muscular ideal and are thus more relevant to them.
Overall, prior studies seem consistent in their findings that exposure to images portraying idealized bodies leads to increased body dissatisfaction. Both traditional media and social media have shown to be platforms relevant to this effect. While women’s body dissatisfaction seems to be more prone to the thin- and athletic ideal in fitspiration, for men this rather regards the muscular ideal shown in traditional media. The same muscular ideal is particularly salient in male fitspiration. Given the match between ideal and gender, it would thus be expected that, for men, exposure to fitspiration portraying the muscular ideal would also lead to increased body dissatisfaction. Thus, building upon prior studies and applying them to the context of young men on Instagram, the following hypothesis will be tested:
H1: For young male adults, exposure to fitspiration on Instagram will lead to more body dissatisfaction than exposure to non-fitspiration on Instagram.
Social comparison has consistently been identified as a relevant concept in relation to body dissatisfaction (Hargreaves and Tiggemann, 2009; Robinson et al., 2017; Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2015). Social Comparison Theory poses social comparison to be a means by which people evaluate themselves (Festinger, 1954). By looking at others, people reflect what they see back onto themselves and construct their self-image from this comparison. There are several directions these comparisons can move in: downward, lateral and upward. Downward comparison is when people feel like they are superior to the person they compare themselves to, thus looking down on the other person. When people see themselves as equal to the other person this is called lateral comparison. When people think they are worse off than the other person, thus looking up to them, this is referred to as upward comparison. It is expected that, when men are shown an image of an idealized muscular body as is depicted in fitspiration posts, they will engage in upward body comparison. Especially as the general fitspiration posts are not reflective of the average male body. Achieving a body like the men in fitspiration posts is, generally speaking, hard to attain, yet socially desirable (Arbour & Martin Ginis, 2006). On the other hand, when men are shown non-fitspiration post, like a picture of an average male, they are expected to make lateral body comparisons or no body comparison at all. Upward body comparisons, in turn, seem to cause increased body dissatisfaction amongst women (Leahey, Crowther, & Mickelson, 2007).
In advertising formats, exposure to the male muscular ideal has indeed been shown to cause upward body comparison with the model. Hargreaves and Tiggemann (2009) used TV commercials to examine the effects of muscular bodies on body comparisons and body
dissatisfaction. A set of commercials depicting muscular men was tested against a set of images of men with ‘normal’ appearances. The muscular set showed to induce more upward body comparison than the control set. The men thus looked up to the muscular men in the commercials. Upward body comparison, in turn, exerted an increase in body dissatisfaction. Robinson et al. (2017) also looked into the role of body comparisons in their experimental study focused on three separate forms of female ideals. However, this study did not distinguish between upward- or downward body comparisons. Exposure to thin- and athletic-ideal posts led young women to engage in more social body comparison, which consequently exerted an increase in body dissatisfaction. These effects did not show from exposure to the muscular ideal images, presumably because this ideal is not preferred by many women, but more often associated with men, thus not inducing as much body comparison (Oehlhof, Musher-Eizenman, Neufeld, & Hauser, 2009).
Several causal studies thus show a mediational effect of body comparison type between exposure to fitspiration and body dissatisfaction. Amongst men this is implied from a traditional media context and amongst women from a fitspiration context on social media. Taken together, these seem to indicate that similar findings will show from exposure to fitspiration on Instagram in a male sample. As the male muscular ideal is preferred by many men (Frederick, Fessler, & Haselton, 2005; Karazsia, Murnen, & Tylka, 2017; Talbot, Cass, & Smith, 2020), exposure to the muscular ideal in fitspiration is expected to induce upward body comparison in a similar way as the thin- and athletic ideal did amongst women, and this will lead to increased body dissatisfaction. This mediational effect will be tested through the following hypotheses:
H2: Exposure to fitspiration on Instagram will lead to more upwardbody comparison among young male adults than exposure to non-fitspiration on Instagram.
H3: Young male adults who engage in more upward body comparison experience more body dissatisfaction than those who engage less in upward body comparison.
Sociocultural theory of body dissatisfaction poses that; besides body comparison type, internalization of media ideals serves a big role in the effects of social media on body dissatisfaction (Thompson, 2011). It is expected that the extent to which men internalize this muscular ideal has already been shaped by repeated exposure to prior media: both traditional- and social media (Ghaznavi & Taylor, 2015). The level of internalization these men have developed even before exposure to the stimuli is expected to influence the body comparison type that they participate in as a consequence of being exposed to fitspiration. Little research has been done on this moderating effect.
Prior studies suggest people make stronger comparisons to someone that has features desirable to them (Krayer et al., 2007). When the muscular ideal is highly internalized, men feel a stronger desire to be muscular than when this ideal is not internalized. The muscular assets shown in fitspiration posts will thus be more alluring to the men high in muscular ideal internalization than to men low in muscular ideal internalization. Consequently, as the desire to be muscular is higher, these men are expected to make stronger, upward body comparisons when shown a fitspiration post than men who do not internalize the muscular ideal as much. Men high in muscular ideal internalization would thus look up to the male in the fitspiration post more. When shown a non-fitspiration post, those who highly internalize the muscular ideal are expected to make no body comparison, as they do not strive for an average body. Men low in muscular ideal internalization would engage in lateral- or no body comparison when shown the non-fitspiration post.
One study explored the relationship between acute exposure to images of idealized female bodies and upward body comparison in women (Engeln–Maddox, 2005). All women
were shown a set of three images of which one showed a body shot of a female model in swimwear. Participants were asked to state their thoughts that occurred when viewing the images, both random thoughts as well as thoughts about themselves. They also completed measures of internalization and body image. Results showed that internalization of the thin-ideal was related to making more upward body comparison after women were exposed to the idealized posts. Notably, there was no control group that was not shown the body images. Consequently, due to the set-up of this study, causality could not be assumed.
Besides the aforementioned study, the proposed moderating effect has only been theorized in literature. Botta (1999) focused on the effects of television images portraying ideal bodies in a female sample. Theorizing from Social Comparison Theory and the findings from their survey, they suggest that internalization interacted with exposure. This exposure was described to cause upward body comparison, with the level of body comparison depending on how much they internalized the ideal. Furthermore, an even more elaborate moderated mediation effect has been proposed by Watson, Wells and Hudson (2011), building upon Social Comparison Theory and prior studies. They propose that people who are shown idealized imagery make body comparisons which influence body dissatisfaction. Furthermore, those who highly internalize an ideal are more likely to engage in upward body comparison when shown idealized images in advertisements. Those lower in muscular ideal internalization would rather be expected to make no body comparisons to the men in these images.
The expected moderating effect of ideal internalization is thus mostly suggested in research focused on the thin-ideal for women. Whereas this ideal is the most apparent ideal for women, for men this is rather the muscular ideal (Karazsia et al., 2017). The muscular ideal is deemed to be equally salient in men as the thin-ideal is in women (Oehlhof et al., 2009). Based on the idea that men high in muscular ideal internalization make more upward body comparisons to fitspiration posts than to non-fitspiration posts, compared to men that do not
internalize the muscular ideal as much, muscular ideal internalization is expected to moderate the effect of exposure to fitspiration on body comparison type.
H4: Exposure to fitspiration on Instagram will lead to more upward body comparison than exposure to non-fitspiration on Instagram, and this effect will be stronger for males with higher muscular ideal internalization compared to those with lower muscular ideal internalization.
The overarching proposed conceptual model is shown in Figure 1.
Fig. 1. Proposed conceptual model: Effect of exposure to fitspiration on body dissatisfaction via body comparison type, moderated by muscular ideal internalization.
Method Participants and procedure
This experimental study employs a 2x2 between-subjects, combined strategies design, measuring the effects of exposure to fitspiration (non-fitspiration vs. fitspiration) on body dissatisfaction amongst young male adults’, aged 18 to 30 years old. Herein, body comparison
type is taken into account as a mediator. Muscular ideal internalization (low vs. high) is considered a quasi-independent moderator in the effects of exposure to fitspiration on body comparison type. Participants were recruited through Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn, by sharing the questionnaire link accompanied by a message briefly explaining the topic and duration of the study. Those approached are asked to reshare the questionnaire in their own social sphere. This snowball sampling allowed for cost-effective sampling of participants. Additionally, the questionnaire link was posted on the SurveySwap website to reach more males outside of the personal network.
One participant was excluded as he did not meet the requirement of being aged 18 to 30 years old. The final sample consisted of 133 males with ages ranging from 18 to 30 years old (M = 23.53, SD = 2.44). The sample was relatively highly educated: 63.9% completed higher professional education (HBO) or university education (BSc or MSc). On average, participants worked out three to four times a week. were active Instagram users.
The online experiment was conducted using Qualtrics survey software. To enter the questionnaire, participants firstly had to agree to the informed consent. Hereafter, participants were asked to indicate their gender in order to ensure a male-only sample. If an answer option other than male was selected, participants could not continue the questionnaire. The consequent section of the questionnaire consisted of questions pertaining to the respondent’s demographics, muscular ideal internalization and Instagram usage, followed by exposure to one of the two stimuli, which they were randomly assigned to. Participants could view the stimulus material for as long as they wished to. It was pointed out that they should view the post as long as they would view the post in Instagram, and they could view the post only once. After exposure, questions regarding body comparison type, body dissatisfaction and control questions were posed, and participants were thanked for their participation.
Pilot study
Before launching the final questionnaire, a pilot study was carried out amongst 12 male respondents pertaining to the sample prerequisites. This was done to check the quality of the questionnaire and stimuli. The pilot showed that, overall, the questions were understandable, and the stimuli were perceived as they were intended. The manipulation check for muscularity showed that participants rated the male in the fitspiration post as significantly more muscular than the male in the non-fitspiration post, χ2 (1, N = 12) = 8.40, p = .004, φ = -.84. The realism check showed that the posts did not differ in their perceived realism, χ2 (1, N = 12) = .78, p = .377, φ = -.26. Based on the comments that were given at the end of the questionnaire, minor adjustments were made to clarify some of the questions even more and the no-exposure condition was photoshopped further to resemble more of an average male body. The final questionnaire can be found in Appendix 1.
Materials
Two stimuli were created: a fitspiration Instagram post and a non-fitspiration Instagram post. Both stimulus materials were fictitious Instagram posts from a fictitious account named thisisalex. The post pertaining to the fitspiration condition showed a muscular male, whereas the non-fitspiration condition showed a male with an average body. Both posts were created to match entirely, except for the body of the male Instagram user. This was done in order to control for other possible effects deriving from differences in attractiveness, such as facial features. The body images used for the posts originated from a YouTube fitness makeover video (JuMa Twins, 2016). The background of the posts was a picture taken by the researcher, depicting a garden with home-workout equipment next to the user in order to play into the realism of gyms being closed due to the pandemic currently taking place. The posts showed a description
containing a quote derived from an actual fitspiration post on Instagram: ‘Nothing is better than doing what you love.’ and the hashtag: ‘#homeworkout’.
Measures
Body dissatisfaction. Body dissatisfaction was measured using the 7-item Muscle-Oriented Body Image subscale from the Drive for Muscularity scale (McCreary, Sasse, Saucier, & Dorsch, 2004). This scale is among the most widely used scales for measuring male body dissatisfaction and has been shown to be highly reliable. Its success has been based on the notion that, irrespective of demographics, males find muscularity the most desired body ideal (Cafri & Thompson, 2004). Examples of items are: ‘‘I wish I were more muscular’’, and ‘‘I think that my chest is not muscular enough.’’. Respondents were asked to mark their agreement with the statements on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree). Factor analysis showed that all items load onto one factor (Eigenvalue = 3.69, variance explained = 52.64%). Reliability analysis showed that the scale created from these items was reliable (α = .83. The mean score of the 7 items was used to assess body dissatisfaction (M = 3.31, SD = .72). A higher score on this scale yields more body dissatisfaction.
Body comparison type. The measurement for body comparison type, was based on the three State Appearance Comparison items used by Tiggemann and McGill (2004). The original three items measured the extent to which participants compare themselves to others when they were shown magazines containing ideal bodies, based on general appearance as well as specific body parts. The items were adjusted to measure if the participants made body comparisons to the males depicted in the stimuli and additionally whether these body comparisons were downward-, lateral-, or upward comparisons. Consequently, the three items that were used are: ‘‘How did you think you look in comparison to the Instagram user?’’, ‘‘How did you judge your own appearance compared to that of the Instagram user?’’ and ‘‘How did you judge your
muscularity compared to that of the Instagram user?’’. Participants ranked the direction of their body comparison on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = a lot worse, 5 = a lot better). In case participants did not compare themselves to the Instagram user whilst viewing the post, they were asked to indicate this using the third answer option (3 = did not think about this/somewhat similar). Factor analysis showed that all items load onto one factor (Eigenvalue = 2.31, variance explained = 76.92%). The scale created from these items was reliable, α = .83). The mean score of the 3 items was used to assess body comparison type (M = 3.04, SD = .76). Lower scores on this scale indicate higher levels of upward body comparison.
Muscular ideal internalization. The SATAQ-4 R scale measures the internalization of ideals and was validated for use amongst young male adults (Schaefer, Harriger, Heinberg, Soderberg, & Thompson, 2016). Items related to muscularity and appearance were selected for use, as this study aims to measure internalization of the muscular ideal. This resulted in 4 items measuring muscular ideal internalization, for example: ‘‘I want my body to look muscular’’ and ‘‘I don’t think much about how I look’’. The latter needed to be recoded so that a higher score on all items yields higher internalization. All items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree). Factor analysis showed that the items loaded onto one factor. Consequently, a scale was created, measuring muscular ideal internalization (Eigenvalue = 1.87, variance explained = 23.34%). The scale showed to be reliable, α = .79. The mean scores of the items were used in assessing muscular ideal internalization (M = 3.45, SD = .72). Furthermore, the internalization scale was recoded into internalization levels using a median split, for which the median was 3.5 (0 = low internalization and 1 = high internalization).
Control variables and randomization checks. Several background and control variables were measured. These variables checked if (1 = yes, 2 = no) and how often per day the men used Instagram (1 = less than half an hour, 2 = between half an hour and 1 hour, 3 =
between 1-2 hours, 4 = between 2-3 hours, 5 = more than 3 hours). How often they viewed similar posts (1 = never, 2 = yearly, 3 = monthly, 4 = weekly, 5 = daily), general workout frequency and wanted workout frequency (1 = never, 2 = 1-2 times a week, 3 = 3-4 times a week, 4 = 6-5 times a week, 5 = more than 6 times a week) were also measured. Related to these workout frequency measures; participants’ actual workout frequency was detracted from their wanted workout frequency in order to generate a new variable displaying the discrepancy between these two values. This variable consequently shows how satisfied the respondents are with their workout habits. Additionally, gender, age and education level were measured.
Lastly, the media pressure subscale from the SATAQ-4 R scale (Schaefer, Harriger, Heinberg, Soderberg, & Thompson, 2016) was used to take into account the possibility of differences in muscle- and appearance related media pressures experienced by the men. 4 of the subscale items were included, stating for example: ‘‘When I see or read media messages, I feel pressure to…’’: ‘‘to improve my appearance,’’ ‘‘to increase the size or definition of my muscles’’. All items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree). Factor analysis for these items showed that the items loaded onto one factor (Eigenvalue = 3.82, variance explained = 47.74%). The scale that was created showed to be highly reliable, α = .91. The mean score of the items was used to assess overall media pressure (M = 2.84, SD = .94).
The test results from the randomization checks can be found in Table 1. Results showed that participants did not differ between experimental groups in their age, education level, Instagram use, Instagram usage per day, workout frequency, workout discrepancy and media pressure. Based on these results, randomization was thus successful.
Besides randomization checks, all control variables were checked for possible correlations with the dependent variable body dissatisfaction. Age showed a significant but low negative correlation with body dissatisfaction, r(131) = -.28, p = .001. Workout discrepancy
showed a significant but low positive correlation with body dissatisfaction, r(131) = .19, p = .025. Lastly, media pressure also showed a significant but low positive correlation with body dissatisfaction, r(131) = .36, p = < .001. Considering these values, these three control variables were included in further analyses.
Table 1. Randomization check results
Exposure to fitspiration Non-fitspiration Fitspiration Age t(131) = .73, p = .468 M = 23.68, SD = 2.56 M = 23.37, SD = 2.32 Education χ2 (4, N = 133) = 6.42, p = .170 high school (3): vocational (4): applied sciences (5): university BSc (6): university MSc (7): 30% 15% 26% 20% 9% 15% 12% 34% 31% 8% Instagram use χ2 (1, N = 133) = .001, p = .969 yes (1): 83% 84%
Instagram use per day t(109) = -.15, p = .880
M = 2.38, SD = 1.05 M = 2.41, SD = .97 Workout frequency t(131) = -1.56, p = .121 M = 2.73, SD = 1.09 M = 3.01, SD = 1.04 Workout discrepancy t(131) = .58, p = .56 M = .62, SD = .67 M = .55, SD = .70 Media pressure t(131) = -1.25, p = .215 M = 2.74, SD = .93 M = 2.94, SD = .93
Manipulation checks. In order to check the effectiveness of the manipulations, respondents were asked to rate the stimulus based on whether or not they found the depicted Instagram user fit, and if they found the user’s body muscular or not. In order to also check the veraciousness of the posts, respondents were asked whether or not they found the post to be realistic.
Additionally, they were asked if they agreed with the statement ‘‘I found the post inspirational’’ (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree) and how often they see similar posts on social media (1 = never, 2 = yearly, 3 = monthly, 4 = weekly, 5 = daily).
Chi-square tests revealed that the male depicted in the fitspiration condition was seen as significantly more fit (99%) than the male depicted in the non-fitspiration condition (58%), χ2 (1, N = 133) = 32.67, p < .001, φ = -.50. The male depicted in the fitspiration condition was also seen as significantly more muscular (88%) than the male depicted in the non-fitspiration condition (5%), χ2 (1, N = 133) = 93.18, p < .001, φ = -.84. Both the fitspiration post (69%) and the non-fitspiration condition (73%) were generally seen as realistic, χ2 (1, N = 133) = .27, p = .606, φ = 0.05. Both posts were comparably inspirational, t(131) = -.78, p = .439, d = 0.14. Notably, both the fitspiration post (M = 2.16, SD = .91) and the non-fitspiration post (M = 2.05, SD = .85) were rated not very inspiring. Participants more often viewed posts similar to the fitspiration post (M = 3.96, SD = 1.30) than posts similar to the non-fitspiration post (M = 3.30, SD = 1.32), t(131) = -2.87, p = .005, d = .50. Similar fitspiration posts were, on average, seen on a weekly basis, whereas similar non-fitspiration posts were averagely seen on a little over a monthly basis.
Overall, both posts were perceived to be equally realistic Instagram posts, although they were not perceived to be very inspirational. The manipulations were considered to be successful, in that they conveyed a notable difference between average and high fitness- and muscularity levels.
Results Main analysis
The moderated mediation model was tested using PROCESS model 7. Herein, the independent variable was exposure to fitspiration and the dependent variable was body dissatisfaction. The
mediating variable was body comparison type and the moderating variable was muscular ideal internalization level. In order to account for the possibility of spurious effects, media pressure, age and workout discrepancy were added to the model as covariates. 5000 bootstrap samples were generated and bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals were used.
As can be seen from the test results in Table 3, there is a weak non-significant direct effect of exposure to fitspiration on body dissatisfaction (b = .07, p = .572). It thus seems that body dissatisfaction is not influenced by exposure to fitspiration, which means that H1 is rejected. Notably, two of the covariates included in the analyses appear to directly influence body dissatisfaction. Media pressure (b = .24, p < .001) and workout discrepancy (b = .19, p = .021) both had a significant weak positive effect on body dissatisfaction.
Regarding the proposed mediation of exposure to fitspiration on body dissatisfaction by body comparison type, there was a considerable significant, negative direct effect of exposure to fitspiration on body comparison type (b = -.41, p = .023). The young men who were exposed to the fitspiration post scored .41 point lower on the body comparison type scale than the young men who saw the non-fitspiration post. A lower score on body comparison type yields more upward comparison, which means that the male depicted in the fitspiration post was seen as superior in terms of muscularity and attractiveness, compared to the participants themselves. H2 was thus supported. As for the direct effect of body comparison type on body dissatisfaction, a weak non-significant effect was found (b = -.07, p = .389). Body comparison type does not seem to influence body dissatisfaction, which rejects H3. Thus, merely the direct effect of exposure to fitspiration on body comparison type was supported. As the effect of body comparison type on body dissatisfaction does not seem to exist, the effect of exposure to fitspiration appears not to be mediated by body comparison type.
Antecedents Model 1 Model 2
Body comparison type Body dissatisfaction
b SE p b SE p
Constant 3.70 .59 < .001 4.25 .68 < .001
Exposure to fitspiration -.41 .18 .023 .07 .13 .572
Body comparison type – – – -.07 .09 .389
Internalization .69 .16 < .001 – – – Exposure to fitspiration * Internalization -.65 .23 .005 – – – Media pressure -.06 .06 .340 .24 .06 < .001 Age -.02 .02 .434 -.07 .02 .005 Workout discrepancy -.09 .08 .278 .19 .08 .021 R2 = .35 F(6,126) = 11.33, p < .001 R2 = .48 F(5,127) = 7.66, p < .001 Note. Media pressure, age and workout discrepancy are included as control variables in the models
Regarding the moderation of the effect of exposure to fitspiration on body comparison type, a significant negative interaction effect was found between exposure to fitspiration and muscular internalization on body comparison type (b = -.65, p = .005), indicating that muscular ideal internalization moderates the relationship of exposure to fitspiration on body comparison type. This interaction effect is shown in Figure 2. Note that a lower score on body comparison type yields more upward body comparison, meaning that participants rate their own body as less attractive than that of the male in depicted in the post. Exposure to the fitspiration post (M = 2.67, SD = .66) led to more upward body comparison than exposure to the non-fitspiration post (M = 3.42, SD = .68), and this effect was stronger for males with higher internalization of the muscular ideal (b = -1.06, p < .001) compared to those with lower internalization of the muscular ideal (b = -.41, p = .023). This thus supports H4. Conspicuously, when exposed to non-fitspiration posts, men high in muscular ideal internalization engage in more downward body comparison: they rate their own appearance as superior to that of the depicted male,
whereas men low in internalization engage in more lateral body comparison: they see themselves as equally attractive, or they do not make a body comparison at all. When exposed to the fitspiration post, there is almost no difference in body comparison type between those low or high in internalization, with both body comparisons leaning more towards upward comparisons: they rate their own bodies as slightly less muscular and attractive than that of the man depicted in the post.
The 95% bootstrap interval of the moderated mediation index (.05) contains both values below and above zero [-.062; .192]. While this proposed relationship thus does seem mostly positively directed, the analysis has shown that moderated mediation was disregarded entirely, attributed mainly to the fact that there is no relationship to be mediated to begin with. However, muscular ideal internalization did moderate the direct effect of exposure to fitspiration on body comparison type.
Fig. 2. Interaction effect of exposure to fitspiration and internalization on body comparison type 2,6 2,8 3 3,2 3,4 3,6 3,8 Non-fitspiration Fitspiration
Body comparison type
Conclusion and discussion
The fitspiration trend on social media has drawn the attention of many scholars, yet their main focus has been on female samples. Fitspiration refers to inspirational posts depicting fit bodies, which are often shared on social media. Instagram, one of the most used social media platforms amongst younger generations (Chen, 2020), is a popular platform for sharing fitspiration posts. While the content is intended to be motivational, there appear to be other consequences to viewing these images (Carrotte et al., 2017; Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2016). Seemingly, younger audiences tend to be more malleable in terms of behaviors and opinions (Callan et al., 2015). The depiction of muscular bodies on Instagram poses the risk of normalization of the muscular ideal, whilst this does not reflect the, generally achievable, average body for young male adults. Prior research has mainly focused on the effects that viewing fitspiration posts has on the wellbeing of women, often showing increased body dissatisfaction and extensive social comparison (Robinson et al., 2017; Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2015). Men, on the other hand, have not been subjected to such causal studies. In an attempt to close this gap, this study ought to clarify the effects fitspiration can have on young male adults’ body dissatisfaction, while taking into account body comparison type and muscle ideal internalization.
The study aimed to answer the following research question: ‘‘What is the effect of exposure to fitspiration on Instagram on young male adults’ body dissatisfaction and to what extent is this effect influenced by body comparison type and muscular ideal internalization?’’. The results imply that exposure to fitspiration does not influence young male adults’ body dissatisfaction. An effect was found from exposure to fitspiration on body comparison type, suggesting that young male adults who viewed the fitspiration post tend to look up to the muscular male in the post, in terms of attractiveness and muscularity. This relationship was moderated by their level of muscular ideal internalization. Men who viewed the fitspiration post, regardless of their level of muscular ideal internalization, showed upward body
comparison to the male depicted in the post. When shown the non-fitspiration post, men high in muscular ideal internalization engaged in downward body comparison. For those low in muscular ideal internalization, the non-fitspiration post triggered no- or lateral body comparison. Interestingly, body comparison type in turn did not influence body dissatisfaction.
In contrast to what previous studies suggested, the current study did not identify a relationship between exposure to fitspiration and body dissatisfaction, thus rejecting H1. Supposedly, this has to do with the fitspiration viewing frequency in the sample. The measurement for viewing frequency of similar posts showed that men in the fitspiration condition generally viewed fitspiration on a weekly basis. While fitspiration viewing frequency was not explicitly measured amongst the non-fitspiration group, overall randomization showed to be successful and it is thus assumed that fitspiration viewing frequency in the non-fitspiration group is comparably high to that of the fitspiration group. This would suggest that participants are familiarized with fitspiration content. Presumably, as they had already been repeatedly exposed to this type of posts, acute exposure to the post in this study did not affect them any further. This idea is congruent with findings of Jonason, Krcmar and Sohn (2009), who found that men who frequently looked at fitness magazines experienced more body dissatisfaction than men who less frequently looked at fitness magazines. This could imply that, rather than acute exposure to this ideal, consistent exposure plays a more important role in this relationship. Considerably, two control variables were found to be related to body dissatisfaction in the current study: media pressure and workout discrepancy. Higher perceptions of media pressure resulted in more body dissatisfaction, which was supported by related studies (Barlett, Vowels, & Saucier, 2008). Higher levels of workout discrepancy also resulted in higher body dissatisfaction. Frequent exposure to the muscular ideal can lead men to experience higher pressures from the media to conform to the muscular ideal (Edwards, Tod, Molnar, & Markland, 2016), making them feel like they should be working out more than they really are.
In order to evaluate this relationship, future research should look into the effects of media pressure and workout discrepancy on body dissatisfaction when men are frequently exposed to fitspiration.
As for the proposed mediational effects, men showed more upward body comparison to the muscular male than to the average male. This means that men who saw the fitspiration post looked up to the man, whilst men that saw the post of the average male tended to look down on him; feeling better about themselves. H2 was thus confirmed. However, body comparison type in turn did not seem to influence body dissatisfaction. Thus, H3 was not supported. Consequently, mediation does not seem probable. Annual research reports by Newcom Research & Consultancy B.V. (2019; 2020) studied the development of social media trust in the Netherlands. This report showed that, as of 2018 trust in social media and its content has decreased. This indicates that social media users in the Netherlands have become more critical and possibly more aware of the content that is being shared on social media. It is likely that this decrease in trust explains at least partially the lack of an effect of body comparison type on body dissatisfaction. It might be that men continue to make body comparisons to images of others, like the fitspiration content on Instagram, but they have become more aware of the reality behind those images. The increased awareness of the process behind these images might form a barrier, refusing the influence of the body comparisons to affect their body dissatisfaction. Future research on this topic should consider the influence of perceived trustworthiness of Instagram as an influential factor, in order to control for its possible effects. While this study did not find support for the proposed mediation, this study provides interesting insights into the moderating role of muscular ideal internalization. Muscular ideal internalization and exposure to fitspiration interacted in an unexpected direction. Men who viewed the fitspiration post, regardless of their level of muscular ideal internalization, indeed showed upward body comparison, meaning they looked up to the man in the post, although this
did not appear very strongly. When shown the non-fitspiration post, men high in muscular ideal internalization actually engaged in more downward body comparison, meaning they felt much better about themselves. For those low in muscular ideal internalization, the non-fitspiration post either did not trigger body comparison, or they considered themselves to be equally attractive. This implies that placing more emphasis on average bodies on Instagram, rather than muscular bodies, creates positive affect in its viewers. It would be interesting to see if the results of this study also hold in a non-fitspiration context, where the intent behind the post is not necessarily to motivate viewers to get fit. That is, fitness related posts likely trigger more body related thoughts than other post to begin with. Furthermore, as muscular ideal internalization showed to be relatively high throughout the entire sample, its effects might be relevant to an even larger part of society than this study implies. Teaching young men about body-positivity and encouraging male body-positivity posts could possibly relief some men of their intense need to comply to the muscular ideal. Such emphasis on average male bodies could help shift the norm, from striving to be muscular, more towards being content with the average male body.
References
Arbour, K. P., & Martin Ginis, K. A. (2006). Effects of exposure to muscular and
hypermuscular media images on young men’s muscularity dissatisfaction and body dissatisfaction. Body Image, 3(2), 153–161.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2006.03.004
Barlett, C. P., Vowels, C. L., & Saucier, D. A. (2008). Meta-analyses of the effects of media images on men’s body-image concerns. Journal of Social and Clinical
Barnhart, B. (2020, May 6). How to survive (and outsmart) the Instagram algorithm in 2020. Retrieved June 15, 2020, from https://sproutsocial.com/insights/instagram-algorithm/ Blond, A. (2008). Impacts of exposure to images of ideal bodies on male body dissatisfaction:
A review. Body Image, 5(3), 244–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2008.02.003 Boepple, L., & Thompson, J. K. (2015). A content analytic comparison of fitspiration and
thinspiration websites. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 49(1), 98–101.
https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.22403
Botta, R. A. (1999). Television images and adolescent girls’ body image disturbance. Journal of Communication, 49(2), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02791.x Cafri, G., & Thompson, J. K. (2004). Measuring male body image: A review of the current
methodology. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 5(1), 18–29.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.5.1.18
Callan, M. J., Kim, H., & Matthews, W. J. (2015). Age differences in social comparison tendency and personal relative deprivation. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 196–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.08.003
Carey, R. N., Donaghue, N., & Broderick, P. (2014). Body image concern among Australian adolescent girls: The role of body comparisons with models and peers. Body
Image, 11(1), 81–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.09.006
Carrotte, E.R., Prichard, I., & Lim, M. S. C. (2017). “Fitspiration” on social media: A content analysis of gendered images. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19(3), e95.
https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6368
Chen, J. (2020, January 15). Social media demographics to inform your brand’s strategy in 2020. Retrieved April 6, 2020, from https://sproutsocial.com/insights/new-social-media-demographics/
Durkee, P. K., Polo, P., Muñoz-Reyes, J. A., Rodríguez-Ruiz, C., Losada-Pérez, M.,
Fernández-Martínez, A. B., … Pita, M. (2019). Men’s bodily attractiveness: Muscles as fitness indicators. Evolutionary Psychology, 17(2), 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1474704919852918
Edwards, C., Tod, D., Molnar, G., & Markland, D. (2016). Perceived social pressures and the internalization of the mesomorphic ideal: The role of drive for muscularity and
autonomy in physically active men. Body Image, 16, 63–69.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2015.11.003
Engeln–Maddox, R. (2005). Cognitive responses to idealized media images of women: The relationship of social comparison and critical processing to body image disturbance in college women. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 24(8), 1114–1138.
https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2005.24.8.1114
Fardouly, J., & Vartanian, L. R. (2015). Negative comparisons about one’s appearance mediate the relationship between Facebook usage and body image concerns. Body Image, 12, 82–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.10.004
Fardouly, J., & Vartanian, L. R. (2016). Social media and body image concerns: Current research and future directions. Current Opinion in Psychology, 9, 1–5.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.09.005
Fardouly, J., Willburger, B. K., & Vartanian, L. R. (2017). Instagram use and young women’s body image concerns and self-objectification: Testing mediational pathways. New Media & Society, 20(4), 1380–1395. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817694499 Fatt, S. J., Fardouly, J., & Rapee, R. M. (2019). #malefitspo: Links between viewing
fitspiration posts, muscular-ideal internalisation, body comparisons, body satisfaction, and exercise motivation in men. New Media & Society, 21(6), 1311–1325.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117– 140. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202
Frederick, D. A., Fessler, D. M. T., & Haselton, M. G. (2005). Do representations of male muscularity differ in men’s and women’s magazines? Body Image, 2(1), 81–86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.12.002
Galioto, R., & Crowther, J. H. (2013). The effects of exposure to slender and muscular images on male body dissatisfaction. Body Image, 10(4), 566–573.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.07.009
Ghaznavi, J., & Taylor, L. D. (2015). Bones, body parts, and sex appeal: An analysis of #thinspiration images on popular social media. Body Image, 14, 54–61.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2015.03.006
Grieve, F. G. (2007). A conceptual model of factors contributing to the development of muscle dysmorphia. Eating Disorders, 15(1), 63–80.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10640260601044535
Hargreaves, D. A., & Tiggemann, M. (2003). Longer-term implications of responsiveness to “thin-ideal” television: support for a cumulative hypothesis of body image
disturbance? European Eating Disorders Review, 11(6), 465–477.
https://doi.org/10.1002/erv.509
Hargreaves, D. A., & Tiggemann, M. (2009). Muscular ideal media images and men’s body image: Social comparison processing and individual vulnerability. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 10(2), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014691
Hobza, C. L., & Rochlen, A. B. (2009). Gender role conflict, drive for muscularity, and the impact of ideal media portrayals on men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 10(2), 120–130. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015040
Hoffman, L. H., & Glynn, C. J. (2013). Media and perceptions of reality. The International Encyclopedia of Communication, 6, 73–81.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405186407.wbiecm044.pub2
Holland, G., & Tiggemann, M. (2016). A systematic review of the impact of the use of social networking sites on body image and disordered eating outcomes. Body Image, 17, 100– 110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.02.008
JuMa Twins. (2016, March 30). GYM MUSCLE GAIN BODY TRANSFORMATION CAPTAIN AMERICA WITH FREELETICS GYM [Video file]. In YouTube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaxV2xQMVRw
Jonason, P. K., Krcmar, M., & Sohn, S. (2009). Male body image: The role of muscle magazine exposure, body mass index, and social comparison in men’s body
satisfaction. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 37(5), 627– 629. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2009.37.5.627
Karazsia, B. T., & Crowther, J. H. (2009). Social body comparison and internalization:
Mediators of social influences on men’s muscularity-oriented body dissatisfaction. Body Image, 6(2), 105–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2008.12.003
Karazsia, B. T., Murnen, S. K., & Tylka, T. L. (2017). Is body dissatisfaction changing across time? A cross-temporal meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 143(3), 293–320.
https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000081
Krayer, A., Ingledew, D. K., & Iphofen, R. (2007). Social comparison and body image in adolescence: a grounded theory approach. Health Education Research, 23(5), 892–903.
https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cym076
Leahey, T. M., Crowther, J. H., & Mickelson, K. D. (2007). The Frequency, Nature, and Effects of Naturally Occurring Appearance-Focused Social Comparisons. Behavior Therapy, 38(2), 132–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2006.06.004
Leit, R. A., Gray, J. J., & Pope, H. G. (2002). The media’s representation of the ideal male body: A cause for muscle dysmorphia? International Journal of Eating Disorders, 31(3), 334–338. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.10019
Levine, M. P., & Murnen, S. K. (2009). “Everybody knows that mass media are/are not [pick one] a cause of eating disorders”: A critical review of evidence for a causal link
between media, negative body image, and disordered eating in females. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 28(1), 9–42. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2009.28.1.9 Manaf, N. A., Saravanan, C., & Zuhrah, B. (2016). The prevalence and inter-relationship of
negative body image perception, depression and susceptibility to eating disorders among female medical undergraduate students. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 10(3), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.7860/jcdr/2016/16678.7341
McCreary, D. R., Sasse, D. K., Saucier, D. M., & Dorsch, K. D. (2004). Measuring the drive for muscularity: Factorial validity of the drive for muscularity scale in men and
women. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 5(1), 49–58.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.5.1.49
McNeill, L. S., & Firman, J. L. (2014). Ideal body image: A male perspective on self. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 22(2), 136–143.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2014.04.001
Moss, M. (2012). The Media and the Models of Masculinity. Plymouth, United Kingdom: Lexington Books.
Newcom Research & Consultancy B.V. (2019, January). Nationale Social Media Onderzoek 2019. Retrieved from
https://www.newcom.nl/downloads/Newcom_Nationaal_Social-Media_Onderzoek_2019.pdf
Newcom Research & Consultancy B.V. (2020, January). Nationale Social Media Onderzoek 2020. Retrieved from https://www.newcom.nl/socialmedia2020
Oehlhof, M. E. W., Musher-Eizenman, D. R., Neufeld, J. M., & Hauser, J. C. (2009). Self-objectification and ideal body shape for men and women. Body Image, 6(4), 308–310.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2009.05.002
Olivardia, R., Pope, H. G., Borowiecki, J. J., & Cohane, G. H. (2004). Biceps and body image: The relationship between muscularity and self-esteem, depression, and eating disorder symptoms. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 5(2), 112–120.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.5.2.112
Robinson, L., Prichard, I., Nikolaidis, A., Drummond, C., Drummond, M., & Tiggemann, M. (2017). Idealised media images: The effect of fitspiration imagery on body satisfaction and exercise behaviour. Body Image, 22, 65–71.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2017.06.001
Rodgers, R. F., McLean, S. A., & Paxton, S. J. (2015). Longitudinal relationships among internalization of the media ideal, peer social comparison, and body dissatisfaction: Implications for the tripartite influence model. Developmental Psychology, 51(5), 706– 713. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000013
Schaefer, L. M., Harriger, J. A., Heinberg, L. J., Soderberg, T., & Thompson, J. K. (2016). Development and validation of the sociocultural attitudes towards appearance
questionnaire-4-revised (SATAQ-4R). International Journal of Eating Disorders, 50(2), 104–117. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.22590
Stratton, R., Donovan, C., Bramwell, S., & Loxton, N. J. (2015). Don’t stop till you get enough: Factors driving men towards muscularity. Body Image, 15, 72–80.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2015.07.002
Syrjälä, H., & Leipämaa-Leskinen, H. (2018). Seven Deadly Sins in Consumption. Cheltenham, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Talbot, D., Cass, J., & Smith, E. (2020). Male figural rating scales: A critical review of the literature. Behaviour Change, 37(2), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.1017/bec.2020.5
Thompson, J. K., & Heinberg, L. J. (1999). The media’s influence on body image disturbance and eating disorders: We’ve reviled them, now can we rehabilitate them? Journal of Social Issues, 55(2), 339–353. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00119
Thompson, J. K., & Stice, E. (2001). Thin-ideal internalization: Mounting evidence for a new risk factor for body-image disturbance and eating pathology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(5), 181–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00144 Tiggemann, M., & McGill, B. (2004). The role of social comparison in the effect of magazine
advertisements on women’s mood and body dissatisfaction. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23(1), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.23.1.23.26991 Tiggemann, M., & Zaccardo, M. (2015). “Exercise to be fit, not skinny”: The effect of
fitspiration imagery on women’s body image. Body Image, 15, 61–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2015.06.003
Tiggemann, M., & Zaccardo, M. (2016). ‘Strong is the new skinny’: A content analysis of #fitspiration images on Instagram. Journal of Health Psychology, 23(8), 1003–1011.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105316639436
van den Berg, P., Paxton, S. J., Keery, H., Wall, M., Guo, J., & Neumark-Sztainer, D. (2007). Body dissatisfaction and body comparison with media images in males and
females. Body Image, 4(3), 257–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2007.04.003 Watson, S., Wells, C. D., & Hudson, E. J. (2011). The effects of idealized advertising imagery
on social comparisons, psychological and emotional outcomes, and consumer
vulnerability: A conceptual model. Journal of Promotion Management, 17(4), 407–417.
Appendix 1: Qualtrics questionnaire
Start van blok: Informed Consent
Bedankt voor jouw interesse in dit onderzoek!
Dit onderzoek is alleen gericht op mannen. Het onderzoek heeft namelijk als doel inzicht te krijgen in het mediagebruik en fitness-gerelateerde meningen van mannen. Er zijn hierbij
geen goede of foute antwoorden mogelijk: vul de vragen dus zo veel mogelijk naar waarheid in. Het onderzoek zal 5-10 minuten van je tijd kosten. Deelname is geheel vrijwillig.
Omdat dit onderzoek wordt uitgevoerd onder de verantwoordelijkheid van ASCoR, Universiteit van
Amsterdam, heb je de garantie dat:
- Je anonimiteit is gewaarborgd en je antwoorden niet aan derden worden verstrekt, tenzij je hiervoor uitdrukkelijke toestemming hebt verleend.
- Je zonder reden vroegtijdig kunt stoppen met het onderzoek. Ook kun je binnen 24 uur na deelname je toestemming intrekken voor het gebruik van je antwoorden.
- Deelname aan het onderzoek geen noemenswaardige risico’s of ongemakken met zich meebrengt, er geen moedwillige misleiding plaatsvindt, en er geen expliciet aanstootgevend materiaal wordt getoond.
- Uiterlijk vijf maanden na het onderzoek kun je de beschikking krijgen over een onderzoeksrapportage met de algemene resultaten van het onderzoek.
Voor meer informatie over dit onderzoek en deelname kun je contact opnemen met de projectleider via e-mail: loisneug@hotmail.com.
Mocht je klachten of opmerkingen hebben over het onderzoek kun je contact opnemen met de Commissie Ethiek van de afdeling Communicatiewetenschap, per adres: ASCoR secretariaat, Commissie Ethiek, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam;
020-525 3680; ascor-secr-fmg@uva.nl. Een vertrouwelijke behandeling van je klacht of opmerking is daarbij gewaarborgd.
o
Ik begrijp de bovenstaande tekst en ga akkoord met deelname aan het onderzoek (1)Einde blok: Informed Consent
Start van blok: Demographics
gender Wat is je geslacht?
o
Man (1)o
Vrouw (2)o
Anders (3)age Wat is je leeftijd?
education Wat is je hoogst behaalde opleidingsniveau?
o
Geen formeel opleidingsniveau (1)o
Basisonderwijs (2)o
Middelbare school (VMBO, HAVO, VWO) (3)o
Middelbaar beroepsonderwijs (MBO) (4)o
Hoger beroepsonderwijs (HBO) (5)o
Universitaire Bachelor (BSc) (6)o
Universitaire Master (MSc) (7)o
Universitaire gespecialiseerde opleiding (bijv. PhD) (8)o
Anders, namelijk: (9) ________________________________________________Einde blok: Demographics
internalization Geef aan hoe jij denkt over de volgende stellingen: Helemaal mee
oneens (1)
Oneens (2) Neutraal (3) Eens (4)
Helemaal mee eens (5) Ik vind het belangrijk om er gespierd uit te zien (1)
o
o
o
o
o
Ik denk veel na over mijn gespierdheid (2)o
o
o
o
o
Ik wil dat mijn lichaam er gespierd uitziet (3)
o
o
o
o
o
Ik denk niet veel na over hoe ik eruitzie (4)o
o
o
o
o
pressure Geef aan hoe jij druk vanuit de media ervaart (bijvoorbeeld vanuit televisie, magazines of social media).
Als ik mediaberichten zie of lees, dan voel ik druk om... Helemaal mee
oneens (1)
Oneens (2) Neutraal (3) Eens (4)
Helemaal mee eens (5) mijn uiterlijk te verbeteren (1)
o
o
o
o
o
goed in vorm te zijn (2)o
o
o
o
o
gespierder te zijn (3)o
o
o
o
o
meer spiermassa of spierdefinitie op te bouwen (4)o
o
o
o
o
Einde blok: Internalization
instagram_use Gebruik je Instagram?
o
Ja (1)o
Nee (2)Ga naar: Einde blok Als Gebruik je Instagram? = Nee
instagram_day Hoe vaak gebruik je Instagram?
o
Minder dan een halfuur per dag (1)o
Een halfuur tot 1 uur per dag (2)o
1 tot 2 uur per dag (3)o
2 tot 3 uur per dag (4)o
Meer dan 3 uur per dag (5)Einde blok: Instagram usage
infopost Op de volgende pagina krijg je een Instagram post te zien. Bekijk deze zoals je gewoonlijk zou doen wanneer je deze tegen zou komen op social media. Je krijgt hem één keer te zien. Daarna volgen wat vragen over de Instagram gebruiker en de post.
Einde blok: Post Info
Start van blok: Exposure
f_yes Wanneer je de post hebt bekeken kun je verder naar de vragen.
Einde blok: Exposure
Start van blok: NoExposure
f_no Wanneer je de post hebt bekeken kun je verder naar de vragen.
Einde blok: NoExposure
info_comp De volgende vragen gaan over jouw ideeën over de Instagram post die je zojuist hebt gezien. Er zijn geen goede of foute antwoorden: het gaat om jouw ervaring.
