Fighting Obesity or Obese Persons? Public Perceptions of Obesity-Related Health Messages

Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
International journal of obesity (2005) (Impact Factor: 5). 09/2012; 37(6). DOI: 10.1038/ijo.2012.156
Source: PubMed


This study examined public perceptions of obesity-related public health media campaigns with specific emphasis on the extent to which campaign messages are perceived to be motivating or stigmatizing.

In summer 2011, data were collected online from a nationally representative sample of 1014 adults. Participants viewed a random selection of 10 (from a total of 30) messages from major obesity public health campaigns from the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia, and rated each campaign message according to positive and negative descriptors, including whether it was stigmatizing or motivating. Participants also reported their familiarity with each message and their intentions to comply with the message content.

Participants responded most favorably to messages involving themes of increased fruit and vegetable consumption, and general messages involving multiple health behaviors. Messages that have been publicly criticized for their stigmatizing content received the most negative ratings and the lowest intentions to comply with message content. Furthermore, messages that were perceived to be most positive and motivating made no mention of the word 'obesity' at all, and instead focused on making healthy behavioral changes without reference to body weight.

These findings have important implications for framing messages in public health campaigns to address obesity, and suggest that certain types of messages may lead to increased motivation for behavior change among the public, whereas others may be perceived as stigmatizing and instill less motivation to improve health.

Download full-text


Available from: Rebecca M Puhl, Nov 24, 2014
  • Source
    • "c o m / l o c a t e / i j p s y c h o et al. (2013) also observed a positive correlation between BMI and negative affect; see Preiss et al. (2013) for a recent review. In cultural beauty standards in America, the obese in particular are looked upon as not only being unattractive, but also are likely to be seen as lazy, less intelligent , and less motivated (Ayers, 2008; Xu et al., 2011; Puhl et al., 2013; Hebl et al., 2012; Bradley et al., 2008). Therefore, not surprisingly, persons of high body mass index, particularly the obese, are more likely to be depressed and socially inhibited due to social ostracization and bullying (Phillips et al., 2013; Xu et al., 2011; Bradley et al., 2008). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Reduced cardiovascular responses to psychological stressors have been found to be associated with both obesity and negative affect in adults, but have been less well studied in children and adolescent populations. These findings have most often been interpreted as reflecting reduced sympathetic nervous system response, perhaps associated with heightened baseline sympathetic activation among the obese and those manifesting negative affect. However, obesity and negative affect may themselves be correlated, raising the question of whether they both independently affect cardiovascular reactivity. The present study thus examined the separate effects of obesity and negative affect on both cardiovascular and skin conductance responses to stress (e.g., during a serial subtraction math task) in adolescents, while controlling for baseline levels of autonomic activity during rest. Both obesity and negative affect had independent and negative associations with cardiovascular reactivity, such that reduced stress responses were apparent for obese adolescents and those with high levels of negative affect. In contrast, neither obesity nor negative affect was related to skin conductance responses to stress, implicating specifically noradrenergic mechanisms rather than sympathetic mechanisms generally as being deficient. Moreover, baseline heart rate was unrelated to obesity in this sample, which suggests that heightened baseline of sympathetic activity is not necessary for the reduced cardiovascular reactivity to stress. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier B.V.
    International journal of psychophysiology: official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology 06/2015; 97(2). DOI:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2015.05.016 · 2.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Public health messages that are free of weight focus also appear to be more acceptable to the public and more likely to encourage healthy behaviors than messages emphasizing weight control or obesity prevention. For example, a large nationally representative U.S. survey revealed that participants responded most favorably to public health messages that promoted healthy behaviors without any reference to weight or obesity at all [155]. The survey further showed that messages perceived as weight stigmatizing were negatively received and rated less likely to foster healthy behavior change. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: USING AN ETHICAL LENS, THIS REVIEW EVALUATES TWO METHODS OF WORKING WITHIN PATIENT CARE AND PUBLIC HEALTH: the weight-normative approach (emphasis on weight and weight loss when defining health and well-being) and the weight-inclusive approach (emphasis on viewing health and well-being as multifaceted while directing efforts toward improving health access and reducing weight stigma). Data reveal that the weight-normative approach is not effective for most people because of high rates of weight regain and cycling from weight loss interventions, which are linked to adverse health and well-being. Its predominant focus on weight may also foster stigma in health care and society, and data show that weight stigma is also linked to adverse health and well-being. In contrast, data support a weight-inclusive approach, which is included in models such as Health at Every Size for improving physical (e.g., blood pressure), behavioral (e.g., binge eating), and psychological (e.g., depression) indices, as well as acceptability of public health messages. Therefore, the weight-inclusive approach upholds nonmaleficience and beneficience, whereas the weight-normative approach does not. We offer a theoretical framework that organizes the research included in this review and discuss how it can guide research efforts and help health professionals intervene with their patients and community.
    Journal of obesity 07/2014; 2014:983495. DOI:10.1155/2014/983495
    • "The present findings suggest important implications for clinical practice and public health. Recent public health campaigns have received criticism for their stigmatising and blaming messages that, in contrast to their aims to motivate health behaviours, may have adverse effects on motivation and well-being (Puhl et al., 2012). Our findings represent one step in advancing efforts to develop more effective public health messages and campaigns that promote health behaviours and obesity prevention policies without perpetuating weight stigma. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Objective: The objective of this research was to compare the effects of different causal attributions for overweight and obesity, among individuals with overweight and obesity, on weight-related beliefs, stigmatizing attitudes, and policy support. Design: In Study 1, an online sample of 95 U.S. adults rated the extent to which they believed various factors caused their own weight status. In Study 2, 125 U.S. adults read one of three randomly assigned online passages attributing obesity to personal responsibility, biology, or the "food environment." All participants in both studies were overweight or obese. Main Outcome Measures: All participants reported beliefs about weight-loss, weight-stigmatizing attitudes, and support for obesity-related policies. Results: In Study 1, biological attributions were associated with low weight-malleability beliefs and blame, high policy support, but high internalized weight bias. "Food environment" attributions were not associated with any outcomes, while "personal responsibility" attributions were associated with high prejudice and blame. In Study 2, participants who received information about the food environment reported greater support for food-related policies and greater self-efficacy to lose weight. Conclusion: Emphasizing the role of the food environment in causing obesity may promote food-policy support and health behaviors without imposing the negative consequences associated with other attributions.
    Psychology & Health 04/2014; 29(10):1-29. DOI:10.1080/08870446.2014.916807 · 1.95 Impact Factor
Show more