↓ Skip to main content

Changing attitudes towards obesity – results from a survey experiment

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
18 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Changing attitudes towards obesity – results from a survey experiment
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4275-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. Luck-Sikorski, S. G. Riedel-Heller, J. C. Phelan

Abstract

This experimental study in a population-based sample aimed to compare attitudes towards obesity following three different causal explanations for obesity (individual behavior, environmental factors, genetic factors). The data were derived from an online representative sample. A random subsample of n = 407 participants was included. Two independent variables were investigated: cause of obesity as described in the vignette and cause of obesity as perceived by the participant regardless of vignette. Quality features of the vignettes (accuracy and bias of the vignette) were introduced as moderators to regression models. Three stigma-related outcomes (negative attitudes, blame and social distance) served as dependent variables. Inaccuracy and bias was ascribed to the social environmental and genetic vignettes more often than to the individual cause vignette. Overall, participants preferred individual causes (72.6%). While personal beliefs did not differ between the genetic and environmental cause conditions (Chi(2) = 4.36, p = 0.113), both were different from the distribution seen in the individual cause vignette. Negative attitudes as well as blame were associated with the belief that individuals are responsible for obesity (b = 0.374, p = 0.003; 0.597, p < 0.001), but were not associated with vignette-manipulated causal explanation. The vignette presenting individual responsibility was associated with lower levels of social distance (b = -0.183, p = 0.043). After including perceived inaccuracy and bias as moderators, the individual responsibility vignette was associated with higher levels of blame (emphasis: b = 0.980, p = 0.010; bias: b = 0.778, p = 0.001) and the effect on social distance vanished. This study shows that media and public health campaigns may solidify beliefs that obesity is due to individual causes and consequently increase stigma when presenting individual behavior as a cause of obesity. Public health messages that emphasize the role of social environmental or genetic causes may be ineffective because of entrenched beliefs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 100 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 19%
Student > Bachelor 15 15%
Student > Master 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Researcher 7 7%
Other 21 21%
Unknown 23 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 25%
Social Sciences 13 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 28 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 44. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 May 2023.
All research outputs
#905,299
of 24,762,960 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#958
of 16,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,521
of 315,874 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#21
of 238 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,762,960 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,407 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,874 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 238 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.