Introduction

Body image has been valued as the focus of scientific research, especially since the 1990s¹. Authors agree that this construct is complex and multifaceted^2-3. Furthermore, it involves the image that the individual has from the size, shape and contour of his own body as well as the feelings, thoughts and behaviors in relation to these characteristics^2-3.

Currently, research on body image have privileged the evaluation of body dissatisfaction, mainly in samples of adolescents^4-6. Understood as the negative and subjective evaluation of the own body², body dissatisfaction can occur in several ways. Authors report that the individual can both be dissatisfied with their overall physical appearance⁴, and with some specific body parts^5,7. In addition, some studies highlight that body dissatisfaction may be influenced by several factors such as: ethnicity^8-9, socioeconomic level^8,10, as well as social and cultural factors².

Thus, the environment in which the subject is inserted can directly influence your body image. In this context, the sports environment - and in particular the modalities which value the aesthetic body - can be a way of higher sociocultural pressure motivated by the thin ideal body^11-18. The artistic gymnastics may be cited as an environment in which these relationships are very present, because it implies a certain specific aesthetic body, by the requirement of a favorable biotype for practice^17,19, which can lead athletes of this modality to a deep discontent with their own body.

Therefore, the sterotype body with short stature and low body fat is recommended in artistic gymnastics, because the ability to perform spins in different axes of the body is required constantly in the elements of this sport^19-21. For this reason, artistic gymnastics is often cited as a modality that causes the emergence of specific characteristics of these athletes, such as the commitment of the growth in stature^19,21. Regarding the high performance training, there are speculations that if this is intense and demanding, especially in childhood and adolescence may impair the growth¹⁹. However, a review study performed by Malina et al.²⁰ point out that the stature reached in adulthood gymnastics athletes for both sexes is not compromised by training at young ages or during the peak growth spurt.

Recent studies evaluating anthropometric and maturation measures in athletes from various sports have found associations between these factors and negative body image^22-23 . In addition, the review study conducted by Neves et al.²⁴ identified that few Brazilian research^16,25-26 which considered the specifics of artistic gymnastics noted the influence of psychological factors such as media influence²⁵, anxiety²⁶, perfectionism and mood¹⁶, on the eating disorder risk behavior of these athletes. However, the authors did not take into account the maturational factors and they disregarded the competitive level of individuals, which may influence the magnitude of these relationships. Therefore, we emphasize the importance of assessing body dissatisfaction in artistic gymnastics athletes both in the non-elite and elite levels, and relate it to sociodemographic, anthropometric and maturational factors.

This study aimed to evaluate the existence of overall and specific body dissatisfaction in elite and non-elite artistic gymnastics athletes, and to analyze the influence of sociodemographic, anthropometric and maturational factors on body dissatisfaction.

Method

Results

The study included 323 artistic gymnastics athletes of both sexes, in the city of Três Rios - RJ. However, 38 were excluded due to incomplete data. Thus, the total number of analyzed athletes was 285. Of these, 40 adolescents met the criteria to be considered elite athletes. TABLES 1 and 2 shows, respectively, the description of the sample regarding sociodemographic (sex, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status) and physical (nutritional status, %BF and somatic maturation) variables of elite and non-elite athletes.

Regarding the overall body dissatisfaction, assessed by BSQ, it was identified that 24.9% and 15% of the non-elite and elite athletes, respectively, had some level of dissatisfaction with the body (low, moderate or severe dissatisfaction). With respect to body dissatisfaction of specific areas evaluated by BAS, for the group of non-elite athletes, body areas that had higher average were: the “weight” (2.33 ± 1.45) followed by the “height” (1.83 ± 1.23). As for elite athletes, the “height” had higher average (2.00 ± 1.15) followed by the “weight” (1.93 ± 1.07) (complete data not shown). The Student t test showed a significant difference only for body area “weight” (p = 0.038), and the non-elite athletes had lower average.

TABLE 3 presents the descriptive analysis (mean and standard deviation) of age, socioeconomic status, BMI, %BF, maturation, BSQ and BAS variables. Moreover, it shows the results of the comparison of means between groups (elite and non-elite athletes).

TABLE 4 shows the values obtained through the Pearson correlation test. Values above the diagonal line refer to elite athletes, while those below refer to non-elite athlete.

From the associations shown above for elite athletes, the regression analysis is not justified, because no variable was statistically associated with the BSQ and the BAS. For the group of non-elite athletes, there were two forward multiple linear regression analyzes, with the BSQ and BAS scores as criterion variable. In the first analysis (BSQ), the %BF was inserted in block 1 (by having highest correlation value) and BMI in the block 2. The %BF was responsible for 9.1% of the variance of the BSQ scores(F =25.440;p = 0.001). The BMI did not add explain to the model, and therefore was deleted at the end of regression.

In the second analysis (BAS), we inserted (by order of the correlation value): somatic maturation in block 1; age in block 2; BMI in block 3; and %BF in block 4. Somatic maturation was responsible for 5.0% of the variance of the BAS scores (F = 13.949; p = 0.001). The other variables did not add explanation to the model and therefore did not enter the final regression model.

Discussion

This study aimed to evaluate the existence of overall and specific body dissatisfaction in elite and non-elite artistic gymnastics athletes, and to analyze the influence of sociodemographic, anthropometric and maturation factors on body dissatisfaction. Some authors highlight that aesthetic sports athletes who practice dietary restrictions due to concern about weight may have income decrease in performance^11,16. Therefore, we emphasize the importance of assessing body dissatisfaction in artistic gymnastics athletes, as it is a risk factor for developing eating disorders and it is directly related to food restriction³⁴ . Screening measures may help preventive actions to psychological health of these athletes.

The findings indicated that 24.9% and 15% of the non-elite and elite athletes, respectively, had some level of overall body dissatisfaction. These prevalence confirm data found by some Brazilian researchers who used the same instrument (BSQ) in aesthetic sports athletes. Neves et al.¹⁶ identified 25% of gymnastics athletes with body dissatisfaction considering girls who trained 15 hours per week. Fortes et al.¹¹ found prevalence of 39% of body dissatisfaction in athletes of different aesthetic modalities that trained 10 hours per week. Study conducted by Vieira et al.¹⁸, classified as rhythmic gymnastics athletes those who participated in two state-level competitions, and found that 31.7% were dissatisfied with their bodies. Another possibility is the division by age category, as in the study of Perini et al.³⁵ which found 31.7% and 62.5% of body dissatisfaction in juniors and seniors synchronized swimming athletes, respectively.

Thus, among the national studies, it was found that there is no standard for the classification as elite and non-elite athletes. This research adopted the cutoff point of 30 hours of weekly training, as pointed out by review study conducted by Malina et al.²⁰. Also, this is a criterion that fits the reality of the Artistic Gymnastics Training Center of Três Rios - RJ. The current study identified a lower percentage of body dissatisfaction in the group of elite athletes. Thus, it is necessary to consider the athlete category to evaluation of body dissatisfaction.

With regard to body dissatisfaction of specific areas, few national surveys conducted this assessment. Research by Conti et al.⁷, in adolescents about the same age of those in the present study, found that both boys and girls reported dissatisfaction with stomach area and body weight. Similarly, our study identifies greater average of weight and height in both groups. This indicates that the athletes participating in the study are more dissatisfied with these areas. However, once again, the non-elite athletes showed greater dissatisfaction with their weight when compared to elite athletes.

One possible explanation for these findings is that elite athletes had significantly lower BMI and %BF (TABLE 3). In addition to a natural selection of sports which looks for individuals with these characteristics^17,19, the intensity of elite training helps these athletes present lower BMI and %BF. Thus, despite the competitive environment bring greater pressure in search of an aesthetic body considered socially perfect, intense training “models” the body so that the physical development of elite athletes resembles the ideal body standard valued in society (thinness)¹.

Added to this, the results of association between anthropometric data and body dissatisfaction (TABLE 4) show that the groups are different. BMI and %BF were associated with BSQ only for non-elite athletes and are not significant to elite athletes. To present sample, the body dissatisfaction of the elite athletes is not necessarily associated with anthropometric data. Therefore, the regression analysis was not recommended. It is possible that body dissatisfaction observed in elite athletes is the result of other influences, such as psychological variables, such as perfectionism, mood, eating behavior and media influence.

For non-elite athletes, it is important to note that BMI and %BF showed high significant association (r = 0.83)³³. Furthermore, the two variables were relevant in body dissatisfaction (BSQ) confirming the literature^7,35. However, through the regression analysis, only %BF had an impact on the variance of the BSQ. Possibly, the BMI not added explanation to the model, because for athletes %BF is considered a more appropriate^22,36-37.

The results of multiple linear regression using the BAS as criterion variable indicated that only the somatic maturation modulated 5% of the variation in body dissatisfaction of specific areas. Study by Conti et al.⁷ assessed a group of nonathletes of similar age to the present study, with similar questionnaire, found an association between overweight and dissatisfaction in different body areas. This finding has not been confirmed on non-elite athletes because the BMI was excluded from the regression model. It appears that approximately 95% of dissatisfaction with different body areas can be explained by other factors.

Finally, another important result need to be highlighted: despite the age was statistically different between groups, the somatic maturation did not follow such a relationship. That is, although the elite athletes were older, their maturation stage was similar to that of the non-elite athletes. It seems that, for the evaluated athletes, the training intensity delayed the growth spurt. These findings are still controversial in the literature, because while Nunomura¹⁹ highlights the commitment of growth in stature with intense training, Malina et al.²⁰ claim that the height reached in adulthood for athletes is not compromised by the practice of artistic gymnastics. It is noteworthy that are recent studies that investigated the association of maturation with body dissatisfaction in athletes^23,38-39 and, therefore, are still encouraged future research in the area.

Despite the relevant data found in this research, some limiting factors are worth mentioning. Firstly, the cross-section design makes it impossible to check relationship of cause and effect. In addition, in the case of adolescent athletes, the use of self-report instruments can be questioned, because they may not respond reliably, fearing cuts in staff. However, these methods have been widely used in similar samples ^11,16,18,35.

We suggest future studies in artistic gymnastics athletes to consider other factors involved in body dissatisfaction, such as perfectionism, mood, eating behavior and media influence. This suggestion has hypothesized the fact that body dissatisfaction of artistic gymnastics elite athletes has another motivator than the anthropometric and maturational factors evaluated in this study. Furthermore, assessment of a group of non-athletes could help in understanding the process of the appearance of the body dissatisfaction in non-elite athletes.

We concluded that the non-elite athletes were more dissatisfied with their body and weight than the elite athletes. This was identified by the instrument that assesses the overall body dissatisfaction, as well as the questionnaire that verifies specific questions related to the body areas. In addition, in non-elite athletes, only the %BF and somatic maturation were predictors for overall and specific body dissatisfaction, respectively.

The evaluation of body image in sports should be encouraged as it can prevent the onset or development of psychological disorders such as eating disorders.