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:

Behavior and Psychology

Effects of competing news media frames of weight on antifat stigma, beliefs about weight and support for obesity-related public policies

International Journal of Obesity volume 40, pages 543–549 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Objectives:

In the popular news media, public health officials routinely emphasize the health risks of obesity and portray weight as under personal control. These messages may increase support for policies designed to reduce rates of obesity, but can also increase antifat stigma. Less often, the media cover ‘Health at Every Size’ or ‘Fat Rights’ perspectives that may have the opposite effects. We investigated how exposure to different ‘fat frames’ shifts attitudes about weight and support for obesity policies.

Methods:

Across four experiments (n=2187), people read constructed news articles framing fatness as negative (unhealthy, controllable, acceptable to stigmatize) or positive (healthy, uncontrollable, unacceptable to stigmatize).

Results:

Compared with people who read fat-positive frames, people who read fat-negative frames expressed more: belief in the health risks of being fat (d=0.95–1.22), belief weight is controllable (d=0.38–0.55), support for charging obese people more for health insurance (d=0.26–0.77), antifat prejudice (in three out of four experiments, d=0.28–0.39), willingness to discriminate against fat people (d=0.39–0.71) and less willingness to celebrate body size diversity (d=0.37–0.64). They were also less willing to say that women at the lower end of the obese range could be healthy at their weights. Effects on support for public policies, however, were generally small and/or nonsignificant. Compared with a control condition, exposure to fat-positive frames generally shifted attitudes more than fat-negative frames. In experiment 4, adding a message about the unacceptability of weight-based discrimination to unhealthy/controllable news articles only reduced antifat stigma on one of three measures compared with articles adding a discrimination-acceptable message.

Conclusions:

Exposure to different news frames of fat can shift beliefs about weight-related health risks and weight-based stigma. Shifting policy attitudes, however, is more challenging.

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

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Saguy AC, Almeling R . Fat in the fire? Science, the news media, and the 'obesity epidemic’. Sociol Forum 2008; 23: 53–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Saguy AC . What's Wrong with Fat?. Oxford University Press: New York, 2013.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Saguy AC, Gruys K, Gong S . Social problem construction and national context: news reporting on ‘overweight’ and ‘obesity’ in the U.S. and France. Soc Probl 2010; 57: 586–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Crandall CS, Eshleman A . A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of predudice. Psychol Bull 2003; 129: 414–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Crandall CS, D’Anello S, Sakalli N, Lazarus E, Nejtardt GW, Feather NT . An attribution-value model of prejudice: anti-fat attitudes in six nations. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 2001; 27: 30–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Puhl RM, Latner JD . Stigma, obesity, and the health of the nation’s children. Psychol Bull 2007; 133: 557–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Muennig P, Bench KK . Obesity-associated stigma and physiological markers of stress: evidence from the Dominican Republic. Stress Health 2008; 25: 241–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Puhl RM, Heuer CA . Obesity stigma: important considerations for public health. Am J Public Health 2010; 100: 1019–1028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Pace G . CBSNews 2006.

  11. Saguy AC, Gruys K . Morality and health: news media constructions of overweight and eating disorders. Soc Probl 2010; 57: 231–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Heuer CA, McClure KJ, Puhl RM . Obesity stigma in online news: a visual content analysis. J Health Commun 2011; 16: 976–987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Puhl RM, Peterson JL, DePierre JA, Joerg L . Headless, hungry, and unhealthy: a video content analysis of obese persons portrayed in online news. J Health Commun 2013; 18: 686–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bacon L . Health at Every Size: The Surprising Truth about Your Weight. BenBella Books: Dallas, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mann T, Tomiyama AJ, Westling E, Lew A-M, Samuels B, Chatman J . Medicare's search for effective obesity treatments: diets are not the answer. Am Psychol 2007; 62: 220–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Campos P, Saguy AC, Ernsberger P, Oliver E, Gaesser G . The epidemiology of overweight and obesity: public health crisis or moral panic? Int J Epidemiol 2006; 35: 55–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dodge R . Experts seek to sort out confusion over obesity reports. Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service 2005.

  18. Marchione M . Diet: CDC chief stresses that extra pounds are harmful. The Associated Press 2005.

  19. Cooper C . Fat and Proud: The Politics of Size. Women's Press: London, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Wann M . FAT!SO?: Because You Don't Have to Apologize for Your Size. Ten Speed Press: Berkeley, CA, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Rothblum ED, Solovay S . eds The Fat Studies Reader. New York University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Harding K, Kirby M . Lessons from the Fat-O-Sphere: Quit Dieting and Declare a Truce with Your Body. Pengine Group: New York, NY, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Saguy AC, Riley KW . Weighing both sides: morality, mortality and framing contests over obesity. J Health Polit Policy Law 2005; 30: 869–921.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Daníelsdóttira S, O'Brien KS, Ciao A . Anti-fat prejudice reduction: a review of published studies. Obes Facts 2010; 3: 47–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Saguy AC, Frederick D, Gruys K . Reporting risk, producing prejudice: how news reporting on obesity shapes attitudes about health risk, policy, and prejudice. Soc Sci Med 2014; 111: 125–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. McClure KJ, Puhl RM, Heuer CA . Obesity in the news: do photographic images of obese persons influence antifat attitudes? J Health Commun 2011; 16: 359–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pearl RL, Puhl RM, Brownell KD . Positive media portrayals of obese persons: impact on attitudes and image preferences. Health Psychol 2012; 31: 821–829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Puhl RM, Heuer CA, Sarda V . Framing messages about weight discrimination: impact on public support for legislation. Int J Obes 2011; 35: 863–872.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Brochu PM, Pearl RL, Puhl RM, Brownell KD . Do media portrayals of obesity influence support for weight-related medical policy? Health Psychol 2014; 33: 197–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Gollust SE, Niederdeppe J, Barry CL . Framing the consequences of childhood obesity to increase public support for obesity prevention policy. Am J Public Health 2013; 103: e1–e7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Berinsky AJ, Huber GA, Lenz GS . Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk. Pol Anal 2012; 20: 351–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Buhrmester M, Kwang T, Gosling SD . Amazon's Mechanical Turk a new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspect Psychol Sci 2011; 6: 3–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Paolacci G, Chandler J, Ipeirotis PG . Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgm Decis Mak 2010; 5: 411–419.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Gray PB, Frederick DA . Body image and body type preferences in St. Kitts, Caribbean: a cross-cultural comparison with U.S. samples regarding attitudes towards muscularity, body fat, and breast size. Evol Psychol 2012; 10: 631–655.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. 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 

  36. Morrison TG, O'Connor WE . Psychometric properties of a scale measuring negative attitudes toward overweight individuals. J Soc Psychol 1999; 139: 436–445.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Barry CL, Brescoll VL, Brownell KD, Schlesinger M . Obesity metaphors: how beliefs about the causes of obesity affect support for public policy. Milbank Q 2009; 87: 7–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Cumming G . The new statistics: why and how. Psychol Sci 2014; 25: 7–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hyde JS . The gender similarities hypothesis. Am Psychol 2005; 60: 581–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Simonsohn U Data Colada, 2014.

  41. Gollust SE, Eboh I, Barry CL . Picturing obesity: analyzing the social epidemiology of obesity conveyed through US news media images. Soc Sci Med 2012; 74: 1544–1551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Crean School of Health and Life Sciences, Chapman University, Orange, CA, USA

    D A Frederick & G Sandhu

  2. Department of Sociology, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    A C Saguy

  3. Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    T Mann

Authors
  1. D A Frederick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A C Saguy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G Sandhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. T Mann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to D A Frederick or A C Saguy.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Supplementary Information accompanies this paper on International Journal of Obesity website

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Frederick, D., Saguy, A., Sandhu, G. et al. Effects of competing news media frames of weight on antifat stigma, beliefs about weight and support for obesity-related public policies. Int J Obes 40, 543–549 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2015.195

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2015.195

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links