Untangling the relationships between age, gender, type of sport, perfectionistic self-presentation and motivation on body satisfaction: a cross-sectional study on aesthetic and non-aesthetic female and male athletes aged 10 to 22 years

Study design

This cross-sectional study was part of a larger project named ‘Young People Should Feel Good: Mental Health Through Sports’.27 The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines were adopted.

Participants and settings

Study participants were recruited from one non-aesthetic sport (basketball) and one aesthetic sport (gymnastics). Athletes’ sports levels ranged from recreational to national elite. The participating sports clubs had approximately 170 (basketball) and 440 (gymnastics) members eligible for this study.

Data collection

All athletes within the targeted age range of 10 to 25 years actively participating in a training group or team within the involved sports clubs were informed about the study. All participants provided written informed consent for their contribution to this study and were informed that participation was voluntary and that they could withdraw at any time. Participants younger than 15 years of age needed a written informed consent signed by one caregiver. The survey was anonymous, and no personal information (eg, playing position, competitive level) that could identify individual athletes was collected. The Swedish Ethical Review Authority approved the study before data collection (2021-05588-01).

Patient and public involvement statement

Data collection was performed in collaboration with the sports clubs. Members from the sports clubs were involved in designing the survey, sent out study information to their members about the project and assisted during survey distribution. Athletes completed the questionnaire on an electronic device (eg, tablet, smartphone), and an adult was available to answer potential questions.27 Demographic information collected consisted of age and self-assigned gender.

Measures

Athlete motivation was assessed with the Behavioural Regulation in Sport Questionnaire (BRSQ).28 The questionnaire consists of 24 questions measuring autonomous forms of motivation regulation (intrinsic motivation, integrated regulation, identified regulation), controlled forms (introjected regulation, external regulation) and amotivation. In this study, we only used two factors of autonomous and controlled regulation because these motivational regulation types have shown relationships to health.16 Participants respond on a 7-point scale ranging from ‘1, Strongly disagree’, to ‘7, Strongly agree”. Higher scores indicate higher autonomous and controlled motivation regulation. A previously validated Swedish version of the scale was used,29 and the scale has shown adequate psychometric properties in studies including young athlete samples from the age of 14 years.28

The Perfectionistic Self-Presentation Scale—Junior Form23 assesses perfectionistic self-presentation with 18 items divided into three subscales: perfectionistic self-promotion (proclaiming and displaying one’s perfection), non-display of imperfection (concealing and avoiding behavioural demonstrations of one’s imperfection) and nondisclosure of imperfection (evading and avoiding verbal admissions of one’s imperfection). The scale is adapted to children and adolescents, and each item is scored on a 5-point scale ranging from ‘1, Strongly disagree’ to ‘5, Strongly agree’. A higher score on the scale indicates a higher perfectionistic self-presentation. The scale has shown acceptable psychometric properties when previously evaluated on early adolescents and youths. However, the four-item nondisclosure of imperfection subscale has been indicated with potentially weaker internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha <0.70).23 30 In the present study, we used a back-translated (English to Swedish) version of the scale.

Body satisfaction was assessed with the 10-item version of the Body Appreciation Scale-2 (BAS-2).31 Scores are combined into a single score, and a higher score indicates a higher body appreciation. Body appreciation is regarded to be inversely related to body dissatisfaction and is an independent construct proposed to positively impact wellbeing-related constructs.32 Respondents rate their answers on a five-item scale ranging from ‘Never’ (1) to ‘Always’ (5). The BAS-2 has shown acceptable psychometric properties across genders, nationalities and ages.31 32 In this study, we used a back-translated (English to Swedish) version of the scale.

Statistical analyses

Data screening, calculation of descriptives (mean values, SD) and McDonald’s Omega were performed using SPSS Statistical Package version 29. All other statistical analyses were performed using R software (v4.3.3).33 A hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis was performed in three steps to explore the contribution of predictor variables in explaining variance in body satisfaction. The first step included demographical variables (age, gender, sport), the second step included perfectionistic self-presentation and motivational variables were included in the final step. Finally, a moderation analysis was performed by testing a final model including demographic variables, identified significant predictors and two-way interactions between gender and identified predictors. The assumption of normally distributed residuals was checked by plotting a histogram of residuals for each model. Assumptions of linearity and homogeneity of variance were checked by constructing scatterplots of fitted values against standardised residuals and the square root of standardised absolute residuals, respectively. The assumption of no multicollinearity was checked by calculating variance inflation factors.

Data screening and descriptives

In table 1, descriptives of participants and mean values of self-reported scores of body satisfaction (BAS-2), perfectionistic self-presentation (junior form) and motivation (BRSQ) are shown. Data screening with Mahalanobis distance identified one multivariate outlier (χ²(9) ≥27.88, p≤0.001), and eight cases had incomplete data. These nine cases (6 females, 1 male, 2 missing; median age=12.5) were therefore excluded from further analyses, resulting in a final sample that consisted of 200 cases (females: n=155; males: n=45) with an age range from 10 to 22 years (median=13). The initial inspection of the data revealed a strong correlation between the non-display of imperfection and self-promotion subscales in the current sample (r=0.80). To avoid issues of multicollinearity and to avoid choosing one subscale over another, the two scales were combined into a composite scale (henceforth perfectionistic presentation), which represented the participants’ tendency to show present as perfect and to hide signs of imperfection.

Multiple regression

The three steps of the initial hierarchical regression model are displayed in table 2. In the first model, containing only the background variables of age, gender and sport, the predictors explained 20.3% of the variance (F(3,196)=16.97, p=<0.001), with age and gender contributing significantly to the model. In the second model, two facets of perfectionistic self-presentation were introduced as predictors, adding a total of 18.5% variance to the model (F(4,195=28.47), p=<0.001). Both facets of perfectionistic self-presentation added significantly to the model. Finally, in the third step, autonomous and controlled motivation was added but did not significantly contribute to additional explained variance (ΔR²=0.01, F=2.86, p=0.06).

Post-hoc analyses: moderation

Previous research has indicated differential expression of body satisfaction between young males and females,21 34 and the regression analyses (table 1) showed gender to contribute to body satisfaction scores significantly. In a second analysis, we added gender as a hypothesised moderator to the relationship between perfectionistic self-presentation and body satisfaction. We thus conducted an additional multiple regression analysis including all two-way and three-way interaction terms between the two facets of perfectionistic self-presentation and gender. While no significant interaction was found between perfectionistic presentation and gender (p=0.984), a significant interaction effect was found between perfectionistic non-disclosure and gender (p=0.014). Post-hoc correlation analyses showed that while the correlation between perfectionistic non-disclosure and body satisfaction was moderate and statistically significant for females (r(153)=-0.43, p<0.001), the same correlation was substantially smaller and statistically non-significant for males (r(43)=-0.24, p=0.12). While the difference in statistical significance may be related to the greater number of female participants, the difference in magnitude suggests that the relationship between perfectionistic non-disclosure and body satisfaction is moderated by gender (see figure 1).

Request permission

Clinical implications

Empirical knowledge of individual and environmental factors that can protect young athletes’ body satisfaction is essential for both universal and selective prevention strategies for body dissatisfaction and disordered eating in this population. The findings in the present study indicate that perfectionistic self-presentation, especially non-disclosure of imperfections among female athletes, could be a more predictive indicator of lowered body satisfaction than participation in aesthetic or non-aesthetic sports alone. Aligned with previous research that has found perfectionistic self-presentation as related to body image, identity, dieting behaviour and various forms of psychopathology,35 36 this study suggests that an intensified need to conceal imperfections and portray an image of flawlessness can be of relevance to understanding levels of body satisfaction among young athletes. Further research is, however, required to confirm if perfectionistic self-presentation is a significant factor for levels of body satisfaction among athletes across a broader range of sports, age groups, competitive levels and gender.

In the present study, the hypothesised relationships between sport type (aesthetic, non-aesthetic) and motivation regulation (autonomous, controlled) on levels of body satisfaction were not empirically supported. Likely, differences within sports cultures and environments (eg, clubs, federations, sports systems) play a prominent role in how athletes’ motivation regulation and body satisfaction could be affected by sports participation. As young athletes become immersed in their sports, they are socialised into the sports culture and its normative values.37 Sports cultures that consciously or unconsciously endorse behaviours or practices (eg, preoccupation with nutrient intake, body composition manipulation strategies, body ideals promoting lean body shape for performance) that increase the risk for body dissatisfaction and disordered eating can adversely affect athletes’ views of their bodies. Perfectionistic tendencies can, in addition, be socially acquired through direct observation, imitation, perceived social expectations, criticism and other relational dynamics with significant others.38 39 For example, if a lean athletic body ideal is the standard in the sports culture and deviations from this norm are implicitly or explicitly expressed as undesirable, resulting in negative consequences (eg, reduced attention from coaches, negative comments about body weight/shape), young athletes are likely to internalise this ‘ideal sports body’ narrative. Consequently, they may search for strategies to conceal or resolve deviations from this perceived ideal.

The focus on body composition and nutrient intake, common in some sports (eg, aesthetic), underscores the importance of further empirical investigation of perfectionistic self-presentation about the body within these sports. For instance, Paixão et al24 found body-image-related perfectionistic self-presentation to mediate the relationship between body-image-related cognitive fusion and self-reported disordered eating attitudes/behaviours in a sample of female aesthetic athletes. However, there is still sparse empirical knowledge of how these constructs manifest across genders and a broader range of sports or how perfectionistic self-presentation can be related to sports environmental factors. To date, most research on the social learning of perfectionism has focused on the parent–adolescent dyads. At the same time, less is known about the plausible transfer of perfectionistic social learning from social agents in the young person’s broader social network, which usually expands during adolescence.38 Moreover, qualitative studies are warranted to increase the understanding of health-detrimental processes or practices that could be normalised within sports environments and pose a risk for young athletes’ body dissatisfaction. Promoting a healthy environment within sports settings for young athletes is important to foster both personal and athletic development and to encourage continued sports participation.

Limitations

This study has generated new hypotheses concerning factors related to young athletes’ body satisfaction but also has some limitations. First, contextual factors within or external to the sports setting (eg, family, peer and coach support, socioeconomic factors, academic demands, sports culture) were not assessed. They could not be controlled in data analyses. Consequently, we cannot rule out that including these variables could have altered the findings of this study. Second, previous research has indicated a relationship between body satisfaction and sustained sports participation. It is plausible that athletes with intensified levels of body dissatisfaction could have terminated their sports involvement, thereby not being represented in this study. Third, the research design was cross-sectional, with data collected exclusively from athletes in two sports (basketball and gymnastics), limiting the generalisability of the study’s results.

Fourth, the age range of participants (10 to 22 years) was broad; developmental differences could confound the effects of the studied variables on body satisfaction. The study also included participants at different sporting levels (from recreational to national elite), where body satisfaction is likely to increase with higher levels of competition. Finally, we combined two subscales with high correlations, and future research needs to consider these subscales separately. While the relatively large sample size was deemed satisfactory for testing the main hypotheses, it would also be appropriate to replicate the findings in a larger sample with an approximately equal gender ratio to examine moderation effects.