Couples losing kinship: A systematic review of weight stigma in romantic relationships

IF 4 1区 社会学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of Social Issues Pub Date : 2022-08-08 DOI:10.1111/josi.12542
Alexandria M. Schmidt, Madeline Jubran, Emily Georgia Salivar, Paula M. Brochu
{"title":"Couples losing kinship: A systematic review of weight stigma in romantic relationships","authors":"Alexandria M. Schmidt,&nbsp;Madeline Jubran,&nbsp;Emily Georgia Salivar,&nbsp;Paula M. Brochu","doi":"10.1111/josi.12542","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Romantic relationship quality is a robust predictor of health and well-being. With increasing awareness of the pervasiveness and harm of weight stigma, it is important to understand the role of weight stigma within romantic relationships. This systematic review sought to synthesize the findings of research examining the association between weight stigma and relationship functioning. Following PRISMA guidelines, 32 relevant articles were identified. Only nine assessed or manipulated weight stigma directly; most measured body mass index (BMI) and examined associations with relationship outcomes. Although, the association between BMI and relationship functioning was inconsistent across studies, weight stigma, most notably in the form of weight criticism between partners, was consistently associated with poorer relationship functioning, including lower relationship satisfaction, sexual intimacy, relationship stability, and constructive communication during conflict. The existing literature is limited by convenience samples of primarily White, heterosexual adults in individualistic countries. Several studies reinforced and expressed weight stigmatizing beliefs due to reliance on weight-normative perspectives on health to interpret findings. Future research is encouraged to examine the association between weight stigma and relationship functioning and underlying mechanisms using dyadic, longitudinal designs that incorporate weight-inclusive approaches. The development of couples-based interventions to address weight stigma in relationships is sorely needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":17008,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social Issues","volume":"79 1","pages":"196-231"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social Issues","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/josi.12542","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Romantic relationship quality is a robust predictor of health and well-being. With increasing awareness of the pervasiveness and harm of weight stigma, it is important to understand the role of weight stigma within romantic relationships. This systematic review sought to synthesize the findings of research examining the association between weight stigma and relationship functioning. Following PRISMA guidelines, 32 relevant articles were identified. Only nine assessed or manipulated weight stigma directly; most measured body mass index (BMI) and examined associations with relationship outcomes. Although, the association between BMI and relationship functioning was inconsistent across studies, weight stigma, most notably in the form of weight criticism between partners, was consistently associated with poorer relationship functioning, including lower relationship satisfaction, sexual intimacy, relationship stability, and constructive communication during conflict. The existing literature is limited by convenience samples of primarily White, heterosexual adults in individualistic countries. Several studies reinforced and expressed weight stigmatizing beliefs due to reliance on weight-normative perspectives on health to interpret findings. Future research is encouraged to examine the association between weight stigma and relationship functioning and underlying mechanisms using dyadic, longitudinal designs that incorporate weight-inclusive approaches. The development of couples-based interventions to address weight stigma in relationships is sorely needed.

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
失去亲属关系的夫妻:对恋爱关系中体重耻辱的系统回顾
恋爱关系的质量是健康和幸福的有力预测指标。随着人们对体重耻辱感的普遍性和危害的认识不断提高,了解体重耻辱感在恋爱关系中的作用变得非常重要。这篇系统综述试图综合研究体重耻辱感和关系功能之间关系的研究结果。按照PRISMA准则,确定了32篇相关文章。只有9个国家直接评估或操纵了柱头重量;大多数人测量了身体质量指数(BMI),并检查了与关系结果的关系。虽然BMI和关系功能之间的关系在研究中并不一致,但体重耻辱,尤其是伴侣之间体重批评的形式,始终与较差的关系功能相关,包括较低的关系满意度、性亲密度、关系稳定性和冲突期间的建设性沟通。现有的文献受限于个人主义国家中主要是白人、异性恋成年人的方便样本。一些研究加强并表达了体重污名化的信念,因为依赖于体重规范的健康观点来解释研究结果。未来的研究被鼓励去检验体重病耻感和关系功能之间的关联,以及使用包含体重的方法的二元纵向设计的潜在机制。迫切需要发展以夫妻为基础的干预措施,以解决关系中的体重耻辱感。结果显示,BMI与女孩和男孩的约会暴力受害之间没有关联。然而,总的来说,认为自己“太胖”的青春期女孩比不认为自己“太胖”的青春期女孩报告了更多的心理和身体伤害。还观察到种族/民族差异。黑人女孩的身体质量指数或自我感觉体重与约会暴力受害者之间没有明显的联系。西班牙裔女孩体重指数“超重”
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
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
73
期刊介绍: Published for The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues (SPSSI), the Journal of Social Issues (JSI) brings behavioral and social science theory, empirical evidence, and practice to bear on human and social problems. Each issue of the journal focuses on a single topic - recent issues, for example, have addressed poverty, housing and health; privacy as a social and psychological concern; youth and violence; and the impact of social class on education.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Challenging the Status-Quo with Practical Theory: Introduction to John T. Jost's Kurt Lewin Award Address From oppressive to affirmative: Situating the health and well-being of LGBTIQ+ people as impacted by systemic and structural transitions in Russia, Turkey, Pakistan, and India Reimagining LGBTIQ+ research – Acknowledging differences across subpopulations, methods, and countries The damaging legacy of damage-centered LGBTIQ+ research: Implications for healthcare and LGBTIQ+ health
×
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:481959085
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