The Effect of Person-First Language on Obesity Stigma.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH American Journal of Health Promotion Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-08 DOI:10.1177/08901171241284551
Rebecca K Hoffman, Stacy M Post, Tonya Dodge, Michelle L Stock
{"title":"The Effect of Person-First Language on Obesity Stigma.","authors":"Rebecca K Hoffman, Stacy M Post, Tonya Dodge, Michelle L Stock","doi":"10.1177/08901171241284551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To test the assumption that person-first language (PFL) reduces obesity stigma, mediated by perceived personal responsibility for obesity.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional, experimental.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Online, United States.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>299 young adults.</p><p><strong>Measures: </strong>Participants read a vignette using PFL or identity-first language (IFL) or about someone without obesity. Participants reported perceived personal responsibility for obesity, and 3 operationalizations of obesity stigma: prejudice, stereotypes, and support for punitive policies. Mediation analyses were used to test if the manipulation affected obesity stigma, through perceived personal responsibility.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no indirect effect of PFL vs IFL on the 3 outcomes (95% CIs contained zero). However, the indirect effects of PFL vs no-obesity condition were significant (prejudice: <i>β</i> = -0.10, <i>SE</i> = 0.05, 95% CI [-0.22, -0.01]; stereotypes: (<i>β</i> = 0.07, <i>SE</i> = 0.03, 95% CI [0.01, 0.14]); punitive punishment: (<i>β</i> = -0.06, <i>SE</i> = 0.04, 95% CI [-0.15, -0.01]). Also, the indirect effects of IFL vs no-obesity condition on stereotypes (<i>β</i> = 0.07, <i>SE</i> = 0.04, 95% CI [0.0003, 0.15]) and punitive punishment (<i>β</i> = -0.06, <i>SE</i> = 0.04, 95% CI [-0.15, -0.0002]) were significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PFL may not affect obesity stigma as it does in the context of other marginalized groups. The effect of PFL and IFL, compared to the no-obesity condition, suggests future routes for intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":7481,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Health Promotion","volume":" ","pages":"388-393"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Health Promotion","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08901171241284551","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To test the assumption that person-first language (PFL) reduces obesity stigma, mediated by perceived personal responsibility for obesity.

Design: Cross-sectional, experimental.

Setting: Online, United States.

Participants: 299 young adults.

Measures: Participants read a vignette using PFL or identity-first language (IFL) or about someone without obesity. Participants reported perceived personal responsibility for obesity, and 3 operationalizations of obesity stigma: prejudice, stereotypes, and support for punitive policies. Mediation analyses were used to test if the manipulation affected obesity stigma, through perceived personal responsibility.

Results: There was no indirect effect of PFL vs IFL on the 3 outcomes (95% CIs contained zero). However, the indirect effects of PFL vs no-obesity condition were significant (prejudice: β = -0.10, SE = 0.05, 95% CI [-0.22, -0.01]; stereotypes: (β = 0.07, SE = 0.03, 95% CI [0.01, 0.14]); punitive punishment: (β = -0.06, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [-0.15, -0.01]). Also, the indirect effects of IFL vs no-obesity condition on stereotypes (β = 0.07, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [0.0003, 0.15]) and punitive punishment (β = -0.06, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [-0.15, -0.0002]) were significant.

Conclusion: PFL may not affect obesity stigma as it does in the context of other marginalized groups. The effect of PFL and IFL, compared to the no-obesity condition, suggests future routes for intervention.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以人为本的语言对肥胖污名化的影响
目的:检验 "以人为本的语言"(PFL)是否能减少肥胖症耻辱感,而肥胖症的个人责任感是否能起到中介作用:设计:横断面实验:参与者:299 名年轻人:参与者阅读一段使用 PFL 或身份优先语言(IFL)或关于没有肥胖症的人的小故事。参与者报告了个人对肥胖的责任感,以及肥胖污名化的三种操作方式:偏见、刻板印象和对惩罚性政策的支持。我们使用了中介分析来检验操纵是否会通过感知到的个人责任影响肥胖成见:结果:PFL 与 IFL 对 3 个结果没有间接影响(95% CIs 为零)。但是,PFL 与无肥胖条件的间接效应显著(偏见:β = -0.10,SE = 0.05,95% CI [-0.22,-0.01];刻板印象:(β = 0.07,SE = 0.03,95% CI [0.01,0.14]);惩罚性惩罚:(β = -0.06,SE = 0.04,95% CI [-0.15,-0.01])。此外,IFL 与无肥胖条件对刻板印象(β = 0.07,SE = 0.04,95% CI [0.0003,0.15])和惩罚性惩罚(β = -0.06,SE = 0.04,95% CI [-0.15,-0.0002])的间接影响也很显著:PFL可能不会像在其他边缘群体中那样影响肥胖耻辱感。与没有肥胖的情况相比,PFL 和 IFL 的效果提示了未来的干预途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal of Health Promotion
American Journal of Health Promotion PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
184
期刊介绍: The editorial goal of the American Journal of Health Promotion is to provide a forum for exchange among the many disciplines involved in health promotion and an interface between researchers and practitioners.
期刊最新文献
Patterns and Predictors of Health and Wellness Coaching Use Among Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Receiving Care From the United States Veterans Health Administration. Childhood Obesity Prevention Intervention: Leveraging Chinese-American Parents' Activation and Locus of Control. What Comes After DEI? The Perceived Organizational Support Theory Re-Visited. Describing the Profile of Individuals at Heightened Risk for Cardiometabolic Multimorbidity: A Secondary Analysis of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging Data. Risk Perceptions Regarding Tuberculosis Among Hispanic Adults - United States, 2020-2022.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1