Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

#Penisenlargement on Instagram: a mixed-methods study

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the reliability of #penisenlargement hashtag on Instagram and to investigate how young adult men perceive their penis size in real-world settings after being exposed to #penisenlargement Instagram postings. In the first phase, the credibility of the 100 most recent publicly accessible postings with the #penisenlargement hashtag was evaluated. Also, the last 1000 posts related to the same hashtag were evaluated to determine follower reach and engagement impacts. In the second phase, men were exposed to the #penisenlargement hashtag for 6 months and completed an online questionnaire examining their motives to undergo augmentation. Only a few (n = 6, 1%) posts had reliable information. At the time of questionnaire completion, participants reported a substantial drop in their genital self-image (22.3 ± 3.6 to 17.8 ± 3.0, p < 0.001) and a significant increase in their media exposure (1.24 ± 1.05 to 2.3 ± 0.74, p < 0.001) compared to their pre-Instagram exposure levels. The most prevalent reason for pursuing penis enlargement following Instagram exposure was to enhance self-perception and confidence. Our findings indicate that penis enlargement methods on Instagram are mostly unreliable. In addition, being exposed to posts pertaining to “penis enlargement” the hashtag can encourage men to seek penis augmentation surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: The characteristics of the last 1000 posts pertained to #penisenlargement.
Fig. 2: The engagement of the last 1000 posts pertained to #penisenlargement.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Mondaini N, Ponchietti R, Gontero P, Muir GH, Natali A, Caldarera E, et al. Penile length is normal in most men seeking penile lengthening procedures. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14:283–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sharp G, Oates J. Nonsurgical medical penile girth augmentation: a retrospective study of psychological and psychosexual outcomes. Aesthet Surg J. 2019;39:306–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Romero-Otero J, Manfredi C, Ralph D, Osmonov D, Verze P, Castiglione F, et al. Non-invasive and surgical penile enhancement interventions for aesthetic or therapeutic purposes: a systematic review. BJU Int. 2021;127:269–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wessells H, Lue TF, McAninch JW. Penile length in the flaccid and erect states: guidelines for penile augmentation. J Urol. 1996;156:995–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Veale D, Miles S, Read J, Troglia A, Wylie K, Muir G. Sexual functioning and behavior of men with body dysmorphic disorder concerning penis size compared with men anxious about penis size and with controls: a cohort study. Sex Med. 2015;3:147–55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Andrew P, Sara A. About three in ten US adults say they are almost constantly online. 26 Mar 2021. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/03/26/about-three-in-ten-u-s-adults-say-they-are-almost-constantly-online/. Accessed 19 Jul 2022.

  7. Brooke A, Monica A. Social media use in 2021. 7 Apr 2021. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/04/07/social-media-use-in-2021/. Accessed 19 Jul 2022.

  8. Deighton-Smith N, Bell BT. Objectifying fitness: a content and thematic analysis of #fitspiration images on social media. Psychol Pop Media Cult. 2018;7:467–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Tiggemann M, Barbato I. “You look great!”: the effect of viewing appearance-related Instagram comments on women’s body image. Body Image. 2018;27:61–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gul M, Diri MA. YouTube as a source of information about premature ejaculation treatment. J Sex Med. 2019;16:1734–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of web surveys: The Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res. 2004;6:e34.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Herbenick D, Schick V, Reece M, Sanders SA, Fortenberry JD. The development and validation of the Male Genital Self-Image Scale: results from a nationally representative probability sample of men in the United States. J Sex Med. 2013;10:1516–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sharp G, Tiggemann M, Mattiske J. Factors that influence the decision to undergo labiaplasty: media, relationships, and psychological well-being. Aesthet Surg J. 2016;36:469–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sharp G, Mattiske J, Vale KI. Motivations, expectations, and experiences of labiaplasty: a qualitative study. Aesthet Surg J. 2016;36:920–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wessells H, Lue TF, McAninch JW. Penile length in the flaccid and erect states: guidelines for penile augmentation. J Urol. 1996;156:995–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Söylemez H, Atar M, Sancaktutar AA, Penbegül N, Bozkurt Y, Onem K. Relationship between penile size and somatometric parameters in 2276 healthy young men. Int J Impot Res. 2012;24:126–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Veale D, Miles S, Bramley S, Muir G, Hodsoll J. Am I normal? A systematic review and construction of nomograms for flaccid and erect penis length and circumference in up to 15,521 men. BJU Int. 2015;115:978–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. García Gómez B, Alonso Isa M, García Rojo E, Fiorillo A, Romero Otero J. Penile length augmentation surgical and non-surgical approaches for aesthetical purposes. Int J Impot Res. 2022;34:332–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vardi Y, Har-Shai Y, Gil T, Gruenwald I. A critical analysis of penile enhancement procedures for patients with normal penile size: surgical techniques, success, and complications. Eur Urol. 2008;54:1042–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bettocchi C, Checchia AA, Falagario UG, Ricapito A, Busetto GM, Cormio L, et al. Male esthetic genital surgery: recommendations and gaps to be filled. Int J Impot Res. 2022;34:392–403.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Oates J, Sharp G. Nonsurgical medical penile girth augmentation: experience-based recommendations. Aesthet Surg J. 2017;37:1032–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hehemann MC, Towe M, Huynh LM, El-Khatib FM, Yafi FA. Penile girth enlargement strategies: what’s the evidence? Sex Med Rev. 2019;7:535–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Califano G, Arcaniolo D, Ruvolo CC, Manfredi C, Smarrazzo F, Cilio S, et al. Glans penis augmentation: when, how, and why? Int J Impot Res. 2022;34:343–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Zaccaro C, Subirà D, López-Diez I, Manfredi C, Ascensios-Vargas JP, Moncada-Iribarren I. History and future perspectives of male aesthetic genital surgery. Int J Impot Res. 2022;34:327–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Salonia A, Bettocchi C, Boeri L, Capogrosso P, Carvalho J, Cilesiz NC, et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on sexual and reproductive health-2021 update: male sexual dysfunction. Eur Urol. 2021;80:333–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cilio S, Collà Ruvolo C, Turco C, Creta M, Capece M, La Rocca R, et al. Analysis of quality information provided by “Dr. YouTube(TM)” on Phimosis. Int J Impot Res. 2022:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-022-00557-5.

  27. Melchionna A, Collà Ruvolo C, Capece M, La Rocca R, Celentano G, Califano G, et al. Testicular pain and youtube™: are uploaded videos a reliable source to get information? Int J Impot Res. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-022-00536-w.

  28. Batur AF, Altintas E, Gül M. Evaluation of YouTube videos on primary bladder pain syndrome. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33:1251–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Jonas WB, Kaptchuk TJ, Linde K. A critical overview of homeopathy. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:393–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Brennan J. Size matters: penis size and sexual position in gay porn profiles. J Homosexuality. 2018;65:912–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sharp G, Oates J. Sociocultural influences on men’s penis size perceptions and decisions to undergo penile augmentation: a qualitative study. Aesthet Surg J. 2019;39:1253–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Veale D, Miles S, Read J, Troglia A, Carmona L, Fiorito C, et al. Phenomenology of men with body dysmorphic disorder concerning penis size compared to men anxious about their penis size and to men without concerns: a cohort study. Body Image. 2015;13:53–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sharp G, Fernando AN, Kyron M, Oates J, McEvoy P. Motivations and psychological characteristics of men seeking penile girth augmentation. Aesthet Surg J. 2022;42:1305–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjac112.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

AÇ contributed to investigation, conceptualization, and writing—original draft preparation. MG contributed to investigation, resources, writing—original draft preparation, writing—review and editing, and methodology.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Murat Gül.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Çağlayan, A., Gül, M. #Penisenlargement on Instagram: a mixed-methods study. Int J Impot Res (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-022-00646-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-022-00646-5

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links