| Title |
Psychometric evaluation of the muscle appearance satisfaction scale in a Mexican male sample
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Eating and Weight Disorders - Studies on Anorexia, Bulimia and Obesity, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40519-017-0366-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
María del Consuelo Escoto Ponce de León, Lilián Elizabeth Bosques-Brugada, Esteban Jaime Camacho Ruiz, Georgina Alvarez-Rayón, Karina Franco Paredes, Gabriela Rodríguez Hernández |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to determine whether the muscle appearance satisfaction scale (MASS) shows acceptable psychometric properties in Mexican bodybuilders. A total of 258 Mexican male bodybuilders were recruited. Two self-report questionnaires, including the MASS and drive for muscularity scale (DMS), were administered. Six models of the latent structure of the MASS were evaluated, using confirmatory factor analysis with maximum likelihood, considering robust Satorra-Bentler correction to estimate the fit of the models to the data. Similar to the original MASS, the series of CFA confirmed that the Mexican version was well represented with the 17-item five-factor structure, which showed a good model fit [Satorra-Bentler Chi-square (109, n = 258) = 189.18, p < 0.0001; NNFI = 0.91; CFI = 0.93; IFI = 0.93; RMSEA = 0.05 (0.04, 0.07)]. Internal consistency was estimated with McDonald's omega, which was acceptable for the MASS (0.88), and their subscales (0.80 to 0.89), except for muscle checking scale (0.77). Test-retest reliability analysis showed stability of the MASS total as well as of the subscale scores over a 2-week period (intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.75-0.91). Construct validity was demonstrated by a significant positive correlation between MASS and DMS results (r = 0.75; p = 0.0001). These results were similar to those of previous studies, which demonstrate the scale's usefulness. Our results support the suitability of the MASS and its subscales to measure muscle dysmorphia symptoms in Mexican male bodybuilders. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 7 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 6 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 9% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 March 2017.
All research outputs
#15,748,573
of 23,999,200 outputs
Outputs from Eating and Weight Disorders - Studies on Anorexia, Bulimia and Obesity
#595
of 1,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,199
of 313,803 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Eating and Weight Disorders - Studies on Anorexia, Bulimia and Obesity
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,999,200 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,078 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,803 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.