Effectiveness of a peer-delivered dissonance-based program in reducing eating disorder risk factors in high school girls.

OBJECTIVE: This pilot study investigated the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of a peer-led dissonance-based eating disorders (ED) prevention/risk factor reduction program with high school girls. METHOD: Ninth grade girls (n = 50) received the peer-led program within the school curriculum. A quasi-experimental design was used to assess changes in ED risk factors preintervention and postintervention compared with waitlist control. Participants were followed through 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Peer-leader adherence to an intervention manual tailored for this age group was high. The intervention was rated as highly acceptable, with a large proportion of participants reporting that they enjoyed the program and learned and applied new information. Intervention participants exhibited significantly greater pre-post reductions in a majority of risk-factor outcomes compared to waitlist controls. When groups were combined to assess program effects over time there were significant pre-post reductions in a majority of outcomes that were sustained through 3-month follow-up. DISCUSSION: This pilot study provides tentative support for the effectiveness of using peer leaders to implement an empirically supported ED risk factor reduction program in a high school setting. Additional research is needed to replicate results in larger, better-controlled trials with longer follow-up.

Is less always more? The effects of low-fat labeling and caloric information on food intake, calorie estimates, taste preference, and health attributions.

The present study examined whether low-fat labeling and caloric information affect food intake, calorie estimates, taste preference, and health perceptions. Participants included 175 female undergraduate students who were randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions. A 2×2 between subjects factorial design was used in which the fat content label and caloric information of chocolate candy was manipulated. The differences in food intake across conditions did not reach statistical significance. However, participants significantly underestimated the calorie content of low-fat-labeled candy. Participants also rated low-fat-labeled candy as significantly better tasting when they had caloric information available. Participants endorsed more positive health attributions for low-fat-labeled candy than for regular-labeled candy, independent of caloric information. The inclusion of eating attitudes and behaviors as covariates did not alter the results. The study findings may be related to the "health halo" associated with low-fat foods and add to the research base by examining the interaction between low-fat and calorie labeling.

Stigmatizing attitudes differ across mental health disorders: a comparison of stigma across eating disorders, obesity, and major depressive disorder.

The aim of the current article was to compare stigmatizing attitudes toward eating disorders (EDs), including anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), and binge eating disorder (BED), with stigma toward another weight-related condition (obesity) and a non-weight-related mental disorder (major depressive disorder [MDD]). Participants (N = 447) read five vignettes describing a woman with AN, BN, BED, obesity, or MDD and responded to questionnaires examining stigmatizing attitudes. The targets with EDs were blamed more for their condition than the targets with MDD, whereas persons with obesity were held more responsible for their condition than any other target. On the other hand, the target with MDD was perceived as more impaired than any other target. Lack of self-discipline was attributed more to the development of BED and obesity than to any other condition. Stigmatizing attitudes vary across mental health disorders, and future research should aim to specifically target stigmatizing beliefs to reduce and prevent discrimination toward mental health disorders and obesity.

Residual obesity stigma: an experimental investigation of bias against obese and lean targets differing in weight-loss history.

This study investigated stigma directed at formerly obese persons who lost weight and became lean (through behavioral or surgical methods), or lost weight but remained obese, relative to weight-stable obese and weight-stable lean persons. This study also compared stigma directed at obese persons following exposure to descriptions of persons who lost weight vs. remained weight stable. In a between-subject experimental design, participants (n = 273) were randomly assigned to read vignettes describing targets varying across two dimensions, weight stability (i.e., weight stable or weight lost) and current weight (i.e., currently obese or currently lean). Participants completed measures of stigma against specific targets and measures of stigma against obese individuals in general. Lean individuals who were formerly obese were stigmatized more on attractiveness than weight-stable lean individuals, and as much as currently obese individuals. Stigma across domains was greater among currently obese individuals (regardless of whether they had lost weight from a higher weight) than among currently lean individuals. After reading vignettes describing weight loss, participants demonstrated greater obesity stigma than after reading vignettes describing weight-stable individuals. These results suggest that residual stigma remains against people who have previously been obese, even when they have lost substantial amounts of weight and regardless of their weight-loss method. Exposure to portrayals of the malleability of body weight, such as those promoted in the popular media, may significantly worsen obesity stigma.