Weight-Normative versus Weight-Inclusive Narratives in Weight-Related Public Health Campaigns: Effects on Anti-Fat Attitudes, Stigma, Motivation, and Self-Efficacy
2022
Suzy McGregor | Stephanie Roberts | Sharon L. Grant | Elyse O’Loghlen
Research has shown that weight-related public health campaigns can inadvertently stigmatise individuals with obesity. We compared the effects of weight-normative (personal responsibility and public health crisis) versus weight-inclusive (Health at Every Size [HAES] and fat acceptance) campaign narratives on anti-fat attitudes and reactions to campaigns in two studies. In study 1, participants (<i>n</i> = 283) from a range of Body Mass Index (BMI) categories viewed one of four mock campaigns before rating their anti-fat-attitudes (dislike, fear of fat, willpower, social distance), and reactions to the campaign (motivation, stigma). In study 2, participants (<i>n</i> = 175) in overweight or obese BMI categories viewed one of four mock campaigns before rating their reactions to the campaign (motivation, stigma, self-efficacy). Study 1 results showed that weight-normative campaigns were perceived as significantly more stigmatising than weight-inclusive ones. However, weight-inclusive campaigns did not decrease anti-fat attitudes or increase motivation for health behaviour change in this sample. Similarly, study 2 results showed that the personal responsibility campaign was rated as significantly more stigmatising than other campaigns among women with overweight or obesity. Fat acceptance was rated as the least stigmatising campaign in this sample, but weight-inclusive narratives did not increase motivation or self-efficacy for health behaviour change. Future research should focus on developing campaign narratives that are non-stigmatising, motivating, and efficacious by addressing health behavior benefits irrespective of sex or weight.
Show more [+] Less [-]AGROVOC Keywords
Bibliographic information
This bibliographic record has been provided by Directory of Open Access Journals