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.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Obesity discrimination: the role of physical appearance, personal ideology, and anti-fat prejudice

International Journal of Obesity volume 37, pages 455–460 (2013)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Objective:

Self-report measures of anti-fat prejudice are regularly used by the field, however, there is no research showing a relationship between explicit measures of anti-fat prejudice and the behavioral manifestation of them; obesity discrimination. The present study examined whether a recently developed measure of anti-fat prejudice, the universal measure of bias (UMB), along with other correlates of prejudicial attitudes and beliefs (that is, authoritarianism, social dominance orientation; SDO, physical appearance investment) predict obesity discrimination.

Method:

Under the guise of a personnel selection task, participants (n=102) gave assessments of obese and non-obese females applying for a managerial position across a number of selection criteria (for example, starting salary, likelihood of selecting). Participants viewed resumes that had attached either a photo of a pre-bariatric surgery obese female (body mass index (BMI)=38–41) or a photo of the same female post-bariatric surgery (BMI=22–24). Participants also completed measures of anti-fat prejudice (UMB) authoritarianism, SDO, physical appearance evaluation and orientation.

Results:

Obesity discrimination was displayed across all selection criteria. Higher UMB subscale scores (distance and negative judgement), authoritarianism, physical appearance evaluation and orientation were associated with greater obesity discrimination. In regression models, UMB ‘distance’ was a predictor of obesity discrimination for perceived leadership potential, starting salary, and overall employability. UMB ‘negative judgement’ predicted discrimination for starting salary; and authoritarianism predicted likelihood of selecting an obese applicant and candidate ranking. Finally, physical appearance evaluation and appearance orientation predicted obesity discrimination for predicted career success and leadership potential, respectively.

Conclusion:

Self-report measures of prejudice act as surrogates for discrimination, but there has been no empirical support for the validity of explicit measures of anti-fat prejudice. Here, the UMB, authoritarianism, and physical appearance investment predicted obesity discrimination. The present results provide support for the use of these measures by researchers seeking to assess, understand, and reduce anti-fat prejudice and discrimination.

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

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. International Obesity Task Force (ed.). International Obesity Task Force Prevalence Data. www.iotf.org/database/index.asp (accessed 25 August 2011).

  2. Andreyeva T, Puhl RM, Brownell KD . Changes in perceived weight discrimination among Americans, 1995-1996 through 2004-2006. Obesity 2008; 16: 1129–1134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Latner JD, Stunkard AJ . Getting worse: the stigmatization of obese children. Obes Res 2003; 11: 452–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Latner J, O’Brien KS, Durso LE, Brinkman LA, MacDonald T . Weighing obesity stigma: relative strength of different targets of bias. Int J Obes 2008; 32: 1145–1152.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. O’Brien KS, Hunter JA, Banks M . Implicit anti-fat bias in physical educators: physical attributes, ideology, and socialisation. Int J Obes 2007; 31: 308–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Neumark-Sztainer D, Story M, Harris T . Beliefs and attitudes about obesity among teachers and school health care providers working with adolescents. J Nutr Educ 1999; 31: 3–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Roehling MV . Weight-based discrimination in employment: psychological and legal aspects. Personnel Psychol 1999; 52: 969–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Puhl RM, Wharton CM, Heuer C . Weight bias among dietetic students: implications for treatment practices. J Am Diet Assoc 2009; 109: 438–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schwartz MB, Chambliss HO, Brownell KD, Blair SN, Billington C . Weight bias among health professionals specializing in obesity. Obes Res 2003; 11: 1033–1039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Crandall CS . Do parents discriminate against their heavyweight daughters? Pers Soc Psych Bull 1995; 21: 724–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Friedman KE, Reichmann SK, Costanzo PR, Zelli A, Ashmore JA, Musante GJ . Weight stigmatization and ideological beliefs: relation to psychological functioning in obese adults. Obes Res 2005; 13: 907–916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Puhl RM, Andreyeva T, Brownell KD . Perceptions of weight discrimination: prevalence and comparison to race and gender discrimination in America. Int J Obes 2008; 32: 992–1000.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Puhl RM, Heuer CA . The stigma of obesity: a review and update. Obesity 2009; 17: 941–964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Vartanian LR . Disgust and perceived control in attitudes towards obese people. Int J Obes 2010; 34: 1302–1307.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. O’Brien KS, Hunter JA, Halberstadt J, Anderson J . Body image and explicit and implicit anti-fat attitudes: the mediating role of physical appearance comparisons. Body Image 2007; 4: 249–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. O’Brien KS, Caputi P, Minto R, Peoples G, Hooper C, Kell S et al. Upward and downward physical appearance-related comparisons: development of a measure and examination of predictive qualities. Body Image 2009; 6: 201–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sidanius J, Pratto F . Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1999.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Crandall CS . Prejudice against fat people: ideology and self-interest. J Pers Soc Psych 1994; 66: 882–894.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Daníelsdóttir S, O’Brien KS, Ciao A . Anti-fat prejudice reduction: a review of published studies. Obesity Facts 2010; 3: 47–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. O'Brien KS, Latner JD, Halberstadt J, Hunter JA, Anderson J, Caputi P . Do antifat attitudes predict antifat behaviors? Obesity 2008; 16: S87–S92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bessenoff GR, Sherman JW . Automatic and controlled components of prejudice toward fat people: evaluation versus stereotype activation. Soc Cogn 2000; 18: 329–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rudolph CW, Wells CL, Weller MD, Baltes BB . A meta-analysis of empirical studies of weight-based bias in the workplace. J Vocat Behav 2009; 74: 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Larkin JC, Pines HA . No fat persons need apply: experimental studies of the overweight stereotype and hiring preference. Sociol Work Occup 1979; 6: 312–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bellizze JA, Hasty RW . Territory assignment decisions and supervising unethical selling behaviour: the effects of obesity and gender as moderated by job-related factors. J Pers Selling Sales Manage 1998; 18: 35–49.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Pagán JA, Dávila A . Obesity, occupational attainment, and earnings. Soc Sci Quart 1997; 78: 756–770.

    Google Scholar 

  26. O’Brien KS, Puhl RM, Latner J, Mir A, Hunter JA . Reducing anti-fat prejudice in pre-service health students: a randomized trial. Obesity 2010; 18: 2138–2144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Zakrisson I . Construction of a short version of the right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) scale. Personality Indiv Differences 2005; 39: 863–872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Cash TF . Users’ Manual for the Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire. 3rd rev. 2000; Available at www.body-images.com.

  29. Langlois JH, Kalakanis L, Rubenstein AJ, Larson A, Hallam M, Smoot M . Maxims or myths of beauty? a meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychol Bull 2000; 126: 390–423.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Lieberman D, Tybur J, Latner JD . Disgust sensitivity, obesity stigma, and gender: contamination psychology predicts weight bias for women, not men. Obesity; e-pub ahead of print 11 August 2011 doi:10.1038/oby.2011.247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Henrich J, Heine SJ, Norenzayan A . The weirdest people in the world? Behav Brain Sci 2010; 33: 61–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Bohner G, Dickel N . Attitude and attitude change. Annu Rev Psychol 2011; 62: 391–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions for improving the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Behavioural Studies, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    K S O'Brien

  2. School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

    K S O'Brien

  3. Department of Psychology, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA

    J D Latner & D Ebneter

  4. Psychology Department, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

    J A Hunter

Authors
  1. K S O'Brien
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J D Latner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D Ebneter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J A Hunter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K S O'Brien.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

O'Brien, K., Latner, J., Ebneter, D. et al. Obesity discrimination: the role of physical appearance, personal ideology, and anti-fat prejudice. Int J Obes 37, 455–460 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2012.52

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2012.52

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links