Prejudice and the Plate: Effects of Weight Bias in Nutrition Judgments.

As millions of people turn to social media for health information, better understanding the factors that guide health-related judgments and perceptions in this context is imperative. We report on two Web experiments (n>400 total) examining the power of society's widespread weight bias and related stereotypes to influence nutrition judgments in social media spaces. In Experiment 1, meals were judged as lower in nutritional quality when the person who recommended them (the source) was depicted as obese rather than of normal weight, an effect mediated by stereotypic beliefs about the source as a generally unhealthy person. Experiment 2 replicated this effect, which--notably--remained significant when controlling for objective nutritional information (calories and fat content). Results highlight spillover effects of weight bias that extend beyond person perception to color impressions of objects (here, food) that are associated with stigmatized attributes. Implications for everyday nutrition judgments and public health are considered.

The theory, development, and implementation of an e-intervention to prevent excessive gestational weight gain: e-Moms Roc.

BACKGROUND: Gaining more weight during pregnancy than is recommended by the Institute of Medicine is prevalent and contributes to the development of obesity in women. This article describes the development and use of e-Moms of Rochester (e-Moms Roc), an electronic intervention (e-intervention), to address this health issue in a socioeconomically diverse sample of pregnant women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Formative research in the form of intercept interviews, in-depth interviews, and focus groups was conducted to inform the design of the e-intervention. The Web site continuously tracked each participant's use of e-intervention features. RESULTS: An e-intervention, including Web site and mobile phone components, was developed and implemented in a randomized control trial. Formative research informed the design. Participants in all arms accessed blogs, local resources, articles, frequently asked questions, and events. Participants in the intervention arms also accessed the weight gain tracker and diet and physical activity goal-setting tools. Overall, 80% of women logged into the Web site and used a tool or feature at least twice. Among those in the intervention arm, 70% used the weight gain tracker, but only 40% used the diet and physical activity goal-setting tools. CONCLUSIONS: To maximize and sustain potential usage of e-Moms Roc over time, the e-intervention included customized reminders, tailored content, and community features such as blogs and resources. Usage was comparable to those in other weight studies with young adults and higher than reported in a published study with pregnant women. This e-intervention specifically designed for pregnant women was used by the majority of women.

Comparing decision making between cancer patients and the general population: thoughts, emotions, or social influence?

This study extends a risk information seeking and processing model to explore the relative effect of cognitive processing strategies, positive and negative emotions, and normative beliefs on individuals' decision making about potential health risks. Most previous research based on this theoretical framework has examined environmental risks. Applying this risk communication model to study health decision making presents an opportunity to explore theoretical boundaries of the model, while also bringing this research to bear on a pressing medical issue: low enrollment in clinical trials. Comparative analysis of data gathered from 2 telephone surveys of a representative national sample (n = 500) and a random sample of cancer patients (n = 411) indicated that emotions played a more substantive role in cancer patients' decisions to enroll in a potential trial, whereas cognitive processing strategies and normative beliefs had greater influences on the decisions of respondents from the national sample.

Individuals' willingness to talk to their doctors about clinical trial enrollment.

This study investigates whether perceived fairness of doctor-patient interactions relates to individuals' willingness to communicate with their doctors about clinical trial enrollment. It also explores how willingness to talk, the perceived fairness of interactions, and trust in doctors relate to intentions to participate in a future clinical trial. Results from a random digit dial (RDD) telephone survey of U.S. adults (N = 500) measured respondents' willingness to talk to their doctors about clinical trials and intentions to participate in future trials. Perceived fairness of interactions and trust in doctors were associated with willingness to talk about clinical trials. A negative relationship emerged between perceived fairness of interactions and intentions to participate when willingness to talk was introduced into the equation. This relationship suggested that when respondents were more willing to talk to their doctors and perceived these discussions as fair, they were also less likely to express intentions to enroll in future trials. In turn, perceiving these interactions as less fair was related to greater intention to enroll. Fairness of interactions and trust in doctors were less relevant to respondents who were less willing to talk to their doctors; however, these respondents also were more likely to express intentions to enroll in future clinical trials.