Pediatric Original Article | Published:

A multinational examination of weight bias: predictors of anti-fat attitudes across four countries

International Journal of Obesity volume 39, pages 11661173 (2015) | Download Citation

Abstract

Background/Objectives:

As rates of obesity have increased throughout much of the world, so too have bias and prejudice toward people with higher body weight (that is, weight bias). Despite considerable evidence of weight bias in the United States, little work has examined its extent and antecedents across different nations. The present study conducted a multinational examination of weight bias in four Western countries with comparable prevalence rates of adult overweight and obesity.

Methods:

Using comprehensive self-report measures with 2866 individuals in Canada, the United States, Iceland and Australia, the authors assessed (1) levels of explicit weight bias (using the Fat Phobia Scale and the Universal Measure of Bias) and multiple sociodemographic predictors (for example, sex, age, race/ethnicity and educational attainment) of weight-biased attitudes and (2) the extent to which weight-related variables, including participants’ own body weight, personal experiences with weight bias and causal attributions of obesity, play a role in expressions of weight bias in different countries.

Results:

The extent of weight bias was consistent across countries, and in each nation attributions of behavioral causes of obesity predicted stronger weight bias, as did beliefs that obesity is attributable to lack of willpower and personal responsibility. In addition, across all countries the magnitude of weight bias was stronger among men and among individuals without family or friends who had experienced this form of bias.

Conclusions:

These findings offer new insights and important implications regarding sociocultural factors that may fuel weight bias across different cultural contexts, and for targets of stigma-reduction efforts in different countries.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    , . The stigma of obesity: a review and update. Obesity 2009; 17: 941–964.

  2. 2.

    , , . Perceptions of weight discrimination: prevalence and comparison to race and gender discrimination in America. Int J Obesity 2008; 32: 992–1000.

  3. 3.

    , , . Associations between perceived weight discrimination and the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in the general population. Obesity 2009; 17: 2033–2039.

  4. 4.

    , . Perceived weight discrimination and obesity. PLoS One 2013; 8: e70048.

  5. 5.

    . Prejudice against fat people. Ideology and self-interest. J Pers Soc Psychol 1994; 66: 882–894.

  6. 6.

    , , . Investigating the validity of stereotypes about overweight employees: the relationship between body weight and normal personality traits. Grp Organiz Manage 2008; 33: 392–424.

  7. 7.

    , , . Implicit and explicit anti-fat bias among a large sample of medical doctors by BMI, race/ethnicity and gender. PLoS One 2012; 7: e48448.

  8. 8.

    , , , . The influence of one's own body weight on implicit and explicit anti-fat bias. Obesity 2006; 14: 440–447.

  9. 9.

    , , . Residual obesity stigma. An experimental investigation of bias against obese and lean targets differing in weight-loss history. Obesity 2012; 20: 2035–2038.

  10. 10.

    , , , , . Reducing anti-fat prejudice in pre-service health students. A randomized trial. Obesity 2010; 18: 2138–2144.

  11. 11.

    , . Culture, ideology, and anti-fat attitudes. Pers Soc Psychol Bul 1996; 22: 1165–1176.

  12. 12.

    , , . Impact of perceived consensus on stereotypes about obese people: a new approach for reducing bias. Health Psychol 2005; 24: 517–525.

  13. 13.

    , , , . Body norms and fat stigma in a global perspective. Cur Anthropology 2011; 52: 269–276.

  14. 14.

    , , , , , . An attribution-value model of prejudice: anti-fat attitudes in six nations. Pers Soc Psychol Bul 2001; 27: 30–37.

  15. 15.

    , , , , , . How do obese individuals perceive and respond to the different types of obesity stigma thatvthey encounter in their daily lives? A qualitative study. Soc Sci Med 2011; 73: 1349–1356.

  16. 16.

    , , , . Assessment of weight stigma. Obes Facts 2010; 3: 60–69.

  17. 17.

    , , , , , et al. The global obesity pandemic: shaped by global drivers and local environments. Lancet 2011; 378: 804–814.

  18. 18.

    . The public health burden of obesity in Canada. Can J Diabetes 2013; 37: 90–96.

  19. 19.

    World Health Organization. Global health observatory data repository. 2013; Retrieved from .

  20. 20.

    Australian Bureau of Statistics (2012). Australian Health Survey: first results, 2011–12.

  21. 21.

    , , , . Prevalence of childhood and adult obesity in the United States, 2011-2012. JAMA 2014; 311: 806–814.

  22. 22.

    , . Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research. Sage: Beverly Hills, CA, 1986.

  23. 23.

    United States Census Bureau (2010). Profile of general population and housing characteristics. Catalogue no.4364.0.55.001. Canberra. Retrieved from .

  24. 24.

    , , , , , et al. The relationship between ethnicity and obesity in Asian and Pacific Islander populations: a literature review. Ethn Dis 2004; 14: 111–118.

  25. 25.

    , , . Body image and self-esteem among Asian, Pacific Islander, and White college students in Hawaii and Australia. Eating Disorders. J Treat Prevent 2011; 19: 355–361.

  26. 26.

    Centers for Disease Control. (2012). Defining overweight and obesity. Overweight and Obesity. Retrieved from .

  27. 27.

    , , . Fat Phobia Scale revisited: the short form. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 2011; 25: 252–257.

  28. 28.

    , , , , . Weighing obesity stigma. Relative strength of different targets of bias. Int J Obesity 2008; 32: 1145–1152.

  29. 29.

    , , , . Weight bias among professionals who treat eating disorders: associations with attitudes about treatment and perceptions of patient outcomes. Int J Eating Disord 2014; 47: 65–75.

  30. 30.

    , , , , , et al. Primary care physicians’ attitudes about obesity and its treatment. Obes Res 2003; 11: 1168–1177.

  31. 31.

    , , . A new stigmatized identity? Comparisons of a ‘Food Addict’ label with other stigmatized health conditions. Behav Soc Psychol 2013; 35: 10–21.

  32. 32.

    , , , . Body image and explicit and implicit anti-fat attitudes: the mediating role of physical appearance comparisons. Body Image 2007; 4: 249–256.

  33. 33.

    StataCorpStata Statistical Software: Release 13 College Station, TX: StataCorp LP 2013.

  34. 34.

    , , , , , . Mistreatment due to weight: prevalence and sources of perceived mistreatment in women and men. Obes Res 1999; 7: 572–576.

  35. 35.

    , , , . The role of the media in body image concerns among women: a meta-analysis of experimental and correlational studies. Psychol Bull 2008; 134: 460–476.

  36. 36.

    , . Understanding self-directed stigma: development of the Weight Bias Internalization Scale. Obesity 2008; 16: S80–S86.

  37. 37.

    , , . Anti-fat prejudice reduction: a review of published studies. Obes Facts 2010; 3: 47–58.

  38. 38.

    . The first amendment and diet industry: how puffery in weight loss advertisements has gone too far. J Law Health 2007; 325–355.

  39. 39.

    , . Systematic review: an evaluation of major commercial weight loss programs in the United States. Annals Intern Med 2005; 142: 56–66.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the Canadian Obesity Network, the Directorate of Health in Iceland and participating universities for their collaboration on this project. We also thank Ximena Ramos Salas for reading an earlier version of the paper and for her assistance in recruitment of Canadian Obesity Network (CON) participants. This study was funded by a donation from the Rudd Foundation.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, University of Connecticut, Hartford, CT, USA

    • R M Puhl
    •  & J Luedicke
  2. Department of Psychology, University of Hawai’i at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii

    • J D Latner
  3. Behavioural Studies, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    • K O'Brien
  4. Division of Health Determinants, Directorate of Health, Reykjavik, Iceland

    • S Danielsdottir
  5. Department of Occupational Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

    • M Forhan

Authors

  1. Search for R M Puhl in:

  2. Search for J D Latner in:

  3. Search for K O'Brien in:

  4. Search for J Luedicke in:

  5. Search for S Danielsdottir in:

  6. Search for M Forhan in:

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R M Puhl.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Revised

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2015.32