Teaching gene-environment interaction concepts with narrative vignettes: Effects on knowledge, stigma, and behavior motivation.

Gene-environment interaction (GxE) concepts underlie a proper understanding of complex disease risk and risk-reducing behavior. Communicating GxE concepts is a challenge. This study designed an educational intervention that communicated GxE concepts in the context of eating behavior and its impact on weight, and tested its efficacy in changing knowledge, stigma, and behavior motivation. The study also explored whether different framings of GxE education and matching frames with individual eating tendencies would result in stronger intervention impact. The experiment included four GxE education conditions and a control condition unrelated to GxE concepts. In the education conditions, participants watched a video introducing GxE concepts then one of four narrative vignettes depicting how a character's experience with eating hyperpalatable or bitter tasting food (reward-based eating drive vs. bitter taste perception scenario) is influenced by genetic or environmental variations (genetic vs. environmental framings). The education intervention increased GxE knowledge, genetic causal attributions, and empathetic concern. Mediation analyses suggest that causal attributions, particularly to genetics and willpower, are key factors that drive downstream stigma and eating behavior outcomes and could be targeted in future interventions. Tailoring GxE education frames to individual traits may lead to more meaningful outcomes. For example, genetic (vs. environmental) framed GxE education may reduce stigma toward individuals with certain eating tendencies among individuals without such tendencies. GxE education interventions would be most likely to achieve desired outcomes such as reducing stigma if they target certain causal beliefs and are strategically tailored to individual attributes.

How shared versus unshared parental contribution to child risk influences guilt responses.

The extent to which parents experience guilt related to their child's health may depend on their perceptions of their contribution to these outcomes. The impact of the child's "other" biological parent's (OBP) contribution to child health on guilt responses is understudied. Some models posit a diffusion-of-responsibility process, while others favor a heightened-risk-heightened-guilt model. The present study examines how perceived OBP contribution to child risk affects guilt among a sample of parents with self-reported overweight. Parents who perceived their child's OBP to also have overweight experienced more guilt for passing down genetic and family environment-based obesity risk to their child, which suggests that perceptions of shared risk contribution promote guilt-related outcomes. Additionally, risk information endorsing a gene-environment interaction liability framing was the most responsive to OBP weight status. These results support a heightened-risk-heightened-guilt process. Future work should consider guilt when developing child health interventions to avoid undesirable emotional outcomes among parents.

Characterizing Precision Nutrition Discourse on Twitter: Quantitative Content Analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is possible that tailoring dietary approaches to an individual's genomic profile could provide optimal dietary inputs for biological functioning and support adherence to dietary management protocols. The science required for such nutrigenetic and nutrigenomic profiling is not yet considered ready for broad application by the scientific and medical communities; however, many personalized nutrition products are available in the marketplace, creating the potential for hype and misleading information on social media. Twitter provides a unique big data source that provides real-time information. Therefore, it has the potential to disseminate evidence-based health information, as well as misinformation. OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize the landscape of precision nutrition content on Twitter, with a specific focus on nutrigenetics and nutrigenomics. We focused on tweet authors, types of content, and presence of misinformation. METHODS: Twitter Archiver was used to capture tweets from September 1, 2020, to December 1, 2020, using keywords related to nutrition and genetics. A random sample of tweets was coded using quantitative content analysis by 4 trained coders. Codebook-driven, quantified information about tweet authors, content details, information quality, and engagement metrics were compiled and analyzed. RESULTS: The most common categories of tweets were precision nutrition products and nutrigenomic concepts. About a quarter (132/504, 26.2%) of tweet authors presented themselves as science experts, medicine experts, or both. Nutrigenetics concepts most frequently came from authors with science and medicine expertise, and tweets about the influence of genes on weight were more likely to come from authors with neither type of expertise. A total of 14.9% (75/504) of the tweets were noted to contain untrue information; these were most likely to occur in the nutrigenomics concepts topic category. CONCLUSIONS: By evaluating social media discourse on precision nutrition on Twitter, we made several observations about the content available in the information environment through which individuals can learn about related concepts and products. Tweet content was consistent with the indicators of medical hype, and the inclusion of potentially misleading and untrue information was common. We identified a contingent of users with scientific and medical expertise who were active in discussing nutrigenomics concepts and products and who may be encouraged to share credible expert advice on precision nutrition and tackle false information as this technology develops.

Evaluating eating behavior traits of virtual targets: Attitudes and empathy.

There are many common stereotypes related to food consumption and eating behaviors that are considered indicative of one's personal character. Negative evaluations of an individual based on their eating behaviors may lead to stigmatization and other harmful psychosocial outcomes. Using vignette scenarios, we examined 582 participants' attitudes towards two target characters who exhibited bitter food dislike and high reward-based eating drive respectively. In open-ended text responses, participants were more likely to respond negatively and use stigmatizing language when describing the character with high reward-based eating drive versus the character with bitter food dislike. In addition, empathic responses depended on whether participants believed they, themselves, exhibited reward-based eating drive. Participants tended to be more empathetic and more positive towards the target who shared their own reward-based eating behaviors. Interestingly, the same was not true for those who shared bitter food distaste. These results suggest that eating behaviors that are perceived as more controllable and unusual may be more negatively perceived. Targeted education or support to reduce negative attitudes about such traits may be beneficial.