4.5 Article

Psychosocial correlates of bulimic symptomatology among male athletes

Journal

PSYCHOLOGY OF SPORT AND EXERCISE
Volume 15, Issue 6, Pages 680-687

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.09.002

Keywords

Male athletes; Bulimic symptomatology; Dietary restraint; Drive for muscularity; Body dissatisfaction

Funding

  1. National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)
  2. Association for Applied Sport Psychology (AASP)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To examine the relationship of four psychosocial constructs - body dissatisfaction, restrained eating, drive for muscularity, and negative affect - that have been identified as potential risk factors for bulimic symptoms in male athletes. Design: We used a cross-sectional design and self-report questionnaires. Methods: Participants were 203 male, NCAA Division I athletes who were drawn from three different U.S. universities and who competed in 17 different varsity sports. Athletes completed self-report measures of body satisfaction, dietary restraint, drive for muscularity (i.e., muscularity behaviors, muscular body image), negative affect (i.e., fear, hostility, guilt, sadness), and bulimic symptomatology. Results: After controlling for the effects of body mass and social desirability, hierarchical regression analysis showed that the psychosocial variables explained an additional 21% of the variance in bulimic symptoms. In the full model, engaging in muscle building behaviors (beta = .16), such as lifting weights, as well as restricting caloric intake (beta = .33) were associated with higher levels of bulimic symptomatology; negative affect and body dissatisfaction were not. Conclusions: Male athletes' bulimic symptomatology is best explained by the extent to which they report engaging in behaviors to become leaner (i.e., less body fat) and more muscular. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available