Andrew C Foster1, Gillian W Shorter2, Mark D Griffiths3. 1. University of Bristol School of Experimental Psychology Bristol UK. 2. University of Ulster Bamford Centre for Mental Health and Wellbeing Londonderry UK University of Ulster MRC All Ireland Trials Methodology Hub Londonderry UK. 3. Nottingham Trent University International Gaming Research Unit, Division of Psychology Burton Street NG1 4BU Nottingham UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Muscle dysmorphia (MD) describes a condition characterised by a misconstrued body image in which individuals who interpret their body size as both small or weak even though they may look normal or highly muscular.MD has been conceptualized as a type of body dysmorphic disorder, an eating disorder, and obsessive–compulsive disorder symptomatology. METHOD AND AIM: Through a review of the most salient literature on MD, this paper proposes an alternative classification of MD--the ‘Addiction to Body Image’ (ABI) model--using Griffiths (2005)addiction components model as the framework in which to define MD as an addiction. RESULTS: It is argued the addictive activity in MD is the maintaining of body image via a number of different activities such as bodybuilding, exercise,eating certain foods, taking specific drugs (e.g., anabolic steroids), shopping for certain foods, food supplements,and the use or purchase of physical exercise accessories). In the ABI model, the perception of the positive effects on the self-body image is accounted for as a critical aspect of the MD condition (rather than addiction to exercise or certain types of eating disorder). CONCLUSIONS: Based on empirical evidence to date, it is proposed that MD could be re-classified as an addiction due to the individual continuing to engage in maintenance behaviours that may cause long-term harm.
BACKGROUND:Muscle dysmorphia (MD) describes a condition characterised by a misconstrued body image in which individuals who interpret their body size as both small or weak even though they may look normal or highly muscular.MD has been conceptualized as a type of body dysmorphic disorder, an eating disorder, and obsessive–compulsive disorder symptomatology. METHOD AND AIM: Through a review of the most salient literature on MD, this paper proposes an alternative classification of MD--the ‘Addiction to Body Image’ (ABI) model--using Griffiths (2005)addiction components model as the framework in which to define MD as an addiction. RESULTS: It is argued the addictive activity in MD is the maintaining of body image via a number of different activities such as bodybuilding, exercise,eating certain foods, taking specific drugs (e.g., anabolic steroids), shopping for certain foods, food supplements,and the use or purchase of physical exercise accessories). In the ABI model, the perception of the positive effects on the self-body image is accounted for as a critical aspect of the MD condition (rather than addiction to exercise or certain types of eating disorder). CONCLUSIONS: Based on empirical evidence to date, it is proposed that MD could be re-classified as an addiction due to the individual continuing to engage in maintenance behaviours that may cause long-term harm.
Entities:
Keywords:
behavioral addiction; body dysmorphic disorder; body image; eating disorder; muscle dysmorphia; obsessive-compulsive disorder
Muscle dysmorphia (MD) describes a condition characterised by a misconstrued body
image in which individuals interpret their body size as both small and weak even
though they may look normal or even be highly muscular (Pope et al., 2005). Those experiencing the condition typically
strive for maximum fat loss and maximum muscular build. MD can have potentially
negative effects on thought processes including depressive states, suicidal
thoughts, and in extreme cases suicide attempts (Pope et al., 2005). These negative psychological states have also been
linked with concurrent use of Appearance and Performance Enhancing Drugs (APED)
including Anabolic Androgenic Steroids (AAS) (Mosley, 2009; Pope et al., 2005).
The use of these substances may not just relate to body image, but also social or
sexual aspects such as producing an enhanced libido or a sense of physical and
psychological wellbeing (Cohen, Collins, Darkes &
Gwartney, 2007).MD was originally categorised by Pope, Katz and
Hudson (1993) as Reverse Anorexia Nervosa, due to characteristic symptoms
in relation to body size. It has been considered to be part of the spectrum of Body
Dysmorphic Disorders (BDD); one of a range of conditions that tap into issues
surrounding body image and eating behaviours (McFarland & Karninski, 2008). Parallels have also been drawn with
Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder (OCD) given some similarities in symptom expression
like ritualistic activity (Phillips, 1998).
Consequently, there is a lack of consensus amongst researchers whether MD is a form
of BDD, OCD or a type of eating disorder (e.g. Jones
& Morgan, 2010; Maida &
Armstrong, 2005; Murray, Rieger, Touyz
& De la Garza Garcia, 2010; Nieuwoudt, Zhou, Coutts & Booker, 2012; Pope, Gruber, Choi, Olivardia & Phillips, 1997; Pope et al., 2005). In this paper, the
limitations of these classification approaches will be discussed, and an alternative
model is proposed – the ‘Addiction to Body Image’ (ABI) model.
HOW IS MUSCLE DYSMORPHIA CURRENTLY CLASSIFIED?
BDD is characterised by a preoccupation with a perceived defect in physical
experience that leads to a substantial functional impairments (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Such a definition can
include MD and in the latest DSM-5, muscle dysmorphia was added as a specifier to
the BDD diagnostic criteria. This representation of Muscle Dysmorphia is supported
by authors such as Pope et al. (1997). In the
context of a preoccupation with the belief that their body is not sufficiently
muscular and lean, and excessive attention to exercise, lifting weights and diet
(possibly including supplements and AAS), the criteria outlined by Pope et al. (1997) – for which two or more need
to be present for a diagnosis of the condition – are:Giving up important activities of a social, work or recreational nature due
to a strong need to maintain activities in relation to workouts and diet
control.Active avoidance of situations where their body is displayed to others, and
an intense distress/anxiety of these situations when they are
unavoidable.Clinically significant distress arising from pre-occupation with their body
fat, size, or musculature.A continuation of dietary control and exercise, despitethe knowledge of
adverse physical or psychological consequences.The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) also classifies MD with other
BDD conditions in section F45.2 entitled hypochondriacal disorder. Essential
features include somatic complaints, preoccupation, and distress in relation to
physical appearance. The category appears to refer to a heterogeneous range of
conditions, and the somatoform description of the MD condition appears unwarranted.
Somatoform disorders relate to physical symptomatology that is difficult to explain
in terms of physical disease, substance use, or other mental disorder. Mosley (2009) considered the ‘somatoform’
description incongruent with MD; Maida and Armstrong
(2005) concurred, given MD symptoms were found to be unrelated to
symptoms of somatoform disorder in men who regularly lifted weights.Other classifications consider MD to be part of the obsessive–compulsive disorder
symptomatology. A shift of BDDs to be classified as OCD spectrum disorders was
considered but rejected due to a lack of evidence (Phillips & Hollander, 1996). There are similarities in symptom
expression including intrusive fear, ritualistic actions or obsessions in the course
of the illness (Bienvenu et al., 2000; Phillips, 1998; Phillips, Dwight & McElroy, 1998; Phillips, Gunderson, Mallya, McElroy & Carter, 1998; Rosen, Reiter & Orosan, 1995; Zimmerman & Mattia, 1998). Despite overlaps
with symptoms and comorbid conditions, Phillips,
Gunderson et al. (1998) note important disparities in social isolation,
delusions, and differences in insight that cast doubt on MD’s suitability for
classification on the OCD spectrum.There are also some parallels drawn to the eating disorders such as anorexia nervosa
or bulimia nervosa given the extent of attention to diet and exercise, and
dissatisfaction with body image (Mangweth et al.,
2001; Olivardia, Pope, Mangweth &
Hudson, 1995). Eating disorders as presented in the Diagnostic and
StatisticalManual are characterised by severe disturbances in eating behaviour and a
preoccupation with eating (American Psychiatric
Association, 2013). The rigour in which an individual pursues the body
ideal is similar amongst the different types of eating disorder and MD. However, the
goals being pursued are very different (e.g. the intrusive fears around weight
relate to gain in Anorexia Nervosa, but loss in MD). Additionally, it could be
considered that a secondary feature of the MD condition is the disordered eating
(Olivardia, 2001), and thus
classification as a disorder of ‘eating’ is not sufficient. Other authors (e.g.,
Demetrovics & Griffiths, 2012) have
mentioned that MD could perhaps be classed as an addiction although there was
limited explanation.
AN ALTERNATIVE CLASSIFICATION: ‘ADDICTION TO BODY IMAGE’ MODEL
The ‘Addiction to Body Image’ (ABI) model attempts to provide an operational
definition and to introduce a standard assessment across the research area. The ABI
model uses the addiction components model of Griffiths (2005) as the framework in which to define muscle dysmorphia
as an addiction. For the purposes of this paper, body image is defined as a person’s
“perceptions, thoughts and feelings about his or her body” (Grogan, 2008, p. 3). The addictive activity is the
maintaining of body image via a number of different activities
such as bodybuilding, exercise, eating certain foods, taking specific drugs (e.g.,
anabolic steroids), shopping for certain foods, food supplements, and purchase or
use of physical exercise accessories). Addiction is defined as the use of a
substance or activity that becomes all-encompassing to the user and comprises all
six of Griffiths’ (2005) addiction
components. Each of these components is described below in the context of MD
symptomatology and behavioural maintenance.
Salience
A person with an ABI may: (i) have cognitive disturbances that lead to a total
preoccupation with activities that maintain body image such as physical training
and eating according to a strict dietary intake (Veale, 2004), (ii) be able to perform other tasks such as work and
shopping (explained by reverse salience – see below) as these tasks will be
designed and built around being able to engage in specific body image
maintenance behaviours such as physical exercising and eating (Olivardia, Pope & Hudson, 2000), and
(iii) be able to manipulate their personal situation to ensure they can perform
these maintenance tasks (Mosley, 2009).
The individual with ABI may even change or forego career opportunities and other
daily activities as it may reduce their ability to train or control eating
behaviour during the day (Murray et al.,
2010).
Reverse salience
If the person with ABI cannot engage in maintenance behaviours such as training
or eating regimes, their thought processes are likely to be excessively
preoccupied by the need to carry out the desired behaviours to maintain body
image (Olivardia et al., 2000). This may
result in the manifestation of physical symptoms. More specifically, the
cognitive disturbance creates a negative thought process that facilitates the
manifestation of physical symptoms (e.g., shakes, sweating, nausea, etc.) as
seen in other addictions. Due to some of the dietary restrictions the person
with ABI places upon their body, physical symptoms such as fainting and falling
unconscious may be present due to low blood sugar levels.
Mood modification
For an individual with ABI, being able to engage in the maintenance behaviours
brings a sense of reward. As a consequence, training and food intake (either
restrictive or over-eating) should facilitate the release of endorphins into the
bloodstream, which would increase positive mood. The physical act of engaging in
physical exercise and training (whether cardio- or weight-based) may produce a
physical state whereby the muscles are enriched with blood (which at their
biggest is known as a ‘pump’). This pump brings a sense of euphoria and
happiness to the person (Elliot, Goldberg, Watts
& Orwoll, 1983).The ABI model proposes that engaging in the maintenance behaviours – for example
weight training – will create a chemical high created by the body though the
release of chemicals such as endorphins (Griffiths, 1997). A person with ABI will desire these chemical
changes and this may have the same effect (both physiologically and
psychologically) as other psychoactive substances. Once their maintenance
behaviours have been completed, the person’s mood will relax due to completion
of the activity, and the person may also have a feeling of utopia, a sense of
inner peace, or an exceptional high. This feeling has been linked to the use of
AASs in gym training (Mosley, 2009).The person with ABI will need to control their food intake (i.e., less or more
protein and carbohydrates). The ABI model proposes this will become a secondary
dependence due to the food intake being part of the process to maintain the
primary dependence (i.e., the sculpting of the body). This will be due to the
body adapting to the amount of calories it is being fed, but also due to
requirement of being lighter or heavier – and for longer – which in turn will
allow the person to obtain the desired body shape.
Tolerance
The person with ABI may need to increase the levels and intensity of the training
or the food restriction (i.e., the maintenance behaviours) to achieve the
desired physiological and/or psychological effects. This can be achieved through
different training strategies or by the consumption of different foods. In some
circumstances, this may be achieved through the use of psychoactive substances
such as AASs or other food inhibiting drugs. Record keeping of training sessions
and seeking out changes in activities may assist the individual in combatting
the effects of tolerance (Mosley,
2009).
Withdrawal
The person with ABI is expected to have negative physical and/or psychological
effects if they are unable to engage in the maintenance activities. This would
be likely to include one or more psychological and/or physical components (Griffiths, 2005) such as intense moodiness
and irritability, anxiety, depression, nausea, and stomach cramps. They will not
be able to just stop the maintenance behaviours without experiencing one or more
of these symptoms.
Conflict
The person with ABI becomes focused on their maintenance behaviours of training
and/or eating. These behaviours can become all consuming, and the need to train,
control diet, and exercise may conflict with their family, their work, the use
of resources (e.g., money) and their life in general. An individual quoted in
Mosley (2009) noted “bodybuilding is
my life, so I make sacrifices elsewhere” (p. 194). In some cases of the
addiction, the process is thought have healthy physical consequences and add to
life in the short-term, in the long-term, the addiction will detract from their
overall quality of life.
Relapse
If the person with ABI manages to stop the maintenance behaviours for a period of
time, they may be susceptible to triggers to re-engage in the behaviours again.
CBT approaches for treatment of MD include aspects which address triggers or
reinforcing behaviour, and reducing stress around maintaining body image to
prevent likelihood of relapse (Grieve, Truba
& Bowersox, 2009). When a person with ABI re-engages with
behaviours again, they may go straight back into previous destructive training
and eating patterns.The ABI model differs from other addiction models in relation to the primary and
secondary dependencies. For instance, in exercise addiction, the individual has
the primary goal of exercising, and the cognitive dysfunction in this condition
is the act of exercising in, and of, itself (Berczik et al., 2012). If the person loses weight or increases their
body size through their exercise, this is seen as a secondary dependence as it
is a natural consequence of the primary dependence and is not the primary goal.
In MD, the primary dependence is maintenance in behaviours that facilitate body
size change due to the cognitive dysfunction of negative perceptions of their
body image. Exercise and/or dietary controls are the secondary dependence as
they assist in achieving the primary goal of maintaining their desired body size
and composition. In addition, exercise addiction tends to relate to compulsive
aerobic exercise, with the endorphin rush from the physical exertion rather than
a reward from physique change. Pope et al.
(1997) also note that (to a degree) aerobic exercise may be avoided
by those with MD as it may reduce muscle size.In the ABI model, the perception of the positive effects on the self-body image
is accounted for as a critical aspect of the MD condition. The maintenance
behaviours of those with ABI may include healthy changes to diet or increases in
exercise. However, such behaviours can hide or mislead those with ABI away from
the negative thought processes that are driving their addiction. It is in the
cognitive dysfunction of MD where we believe there is a pathological issue, and
why the field has encountered problems with the criteria for the condition. The
attempt to explain MD in the same manner as other BDDs may not be adequate due
to the cognitive dysfunction occurring in the context of the potentially
positive physical effects via improvements in shape, tone, and/or health of the
body.The ABI model supports the findings of Pope et
al. (2005); there is a difference in the cognitive dysfunction with a
misconstrued self-body image compared to other BDDs. The cognitive dysfunction
causes the individual with MD to have a misconstrued view of their own body
image, and the person may believe they are small and puny. This negative mindset
has the potential to cause depression and other disorders, and may facilitate
the addiction. Unlike other conceptualizations of MD in the BDD literature, we
would argue that the agent of the addiction is the perceived body image that is
maintained by engaging in secondary behaviours such as specific types of
physical activity and food. The most important thing in the life of someone with
MD is how their body looks (i.e., their body image). The behaviours that the
person with MD engages in (such as excessive exercise or disordered eating) are
merely the vehicles by which their addiction (i.e., their perceived body image)
is maintained.Based on empirical evidence to date, we propose that Muscle Dysmorphia could be
re-classified as an addiction due to the individual continuing to engage in
maintenance behaviours that cause long-term psychological damage. More research
is needed to explore the possibilities of MD as an addiction, and how this
particular addiction is linked to substance use and other comorbid health
conditions. Controversy about the conceptual measurement of the condition, has
led to a number of different scalesadapted from different criteria that may not
fully measure the experience of MD (Cafri &
Thompson, 2007). However, a group of questions that might test the
applicability of the ABI approach to measuring and conceptualising MD have not
been asked. Questionnaires such as the Exercise Addiction Inventory (Griffiths, Szabo & Terry, 2005; Terry, Szabo & Griffiths, 2004) and the
Bergen Work Addiction Scale (Andreassen,
Griffiths, Hetland & Pallesen, 2012) could be adapted to fit MD
characteristics. Adequate conceptualisation is key to explore the clinically
relevant condition (Kuennen & Waldron,
2007). This new ABI approach may also have implications for
diagnostic systems around similar conditions such as other BDDs or eating
disorders. Theoretical and empirical work exploring these in an addiction
context would be welcomed.
Authors: B Mangweth; H G Pope; G Kemmler; C Ebenbichler; A Hausmann; C De Col ; B Kreutner; J Kinzl; W Biebl Journal: Psychother Psychosom Date: 2001 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 17.659
Authors: Stuart B Murray; Elizabeth Rieger; Stephen W Touyz; Yolanda De la Garza García Lic Journal: Int J Eat Disord Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Daniel Kardefelt-Winther; Alexandre Heeren; Adriano Schimmenti; Antonius van Rooij; Pierre Maurage; Michelle Carras; Johan Edman; Alexander Blaszczynski; Yasser Khazaal; Joël Billieux Journal: Addiction Date: 2017-02-15 Impact factor: 6.526