↓ Skip to main content

Applying the contact hypothesis to anti-fat attitudes: Contact with overweight people is related to how we interact with our bodies and those of others

Overview of attention for article published in Social Science & Medicine, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Applying the contact hypothesis to anti-fat attitudes: Contact with overweight people is related to how we interact with our bodies and those of others
Published in
Social Science & Medicine, October 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.10.051
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anandi Alperin, Matthew J. Hornsey, Lydia E. Hayward, Phillippa C. Diedrichs, Fiona Kate Barlow

Abstract

This paper is the first to apply the contact hypothesis, a social psychological theory of prejudice reduction, to the field of weight bias. It aims to investigate whether contact with overweight people is associated with the extent to which people report weight bias, as well as vigilance around their own bodies. In 2013 we recruited 1176 American participants to complete surveys regarding prejudice toward overweight people, as well as a suite of measures capturing people's relationships with their own weight (fat talk, drive for thinness, and body-checking behavior). Positive contact with overweight people predicted decreased prejudice, regardless of whether participants were overweight (p < .001) or not (p = .003). However, negative contact was a stronger predictor of increased prejudice (p < .001 for both samples). For non-overweight participants, any contact with overweight people (whether positive or negative) predicted increased body-checking behaviors (positive-p = .002, negative-p < .001) and fat talk (positive-p = .047, negative-p < .001), and negative contact predicted increased drive for thinness (p < .001). However, for those who were overweight a different picture emerged. While negative contact predicted increased body-checking behaviors (p < .001) and fat talk (p < .001), positive contact was protective, predicting decreased drive for thinness (p = .001) and body-checking behaviors (p < .001). This paper demonstrates that the interactions we have with overweight people are inherently tied to both our attitudes towards them and our relationship with our own bodies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 110 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 21%
Student > Master 17 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Lecturer 6 5%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 26 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 50 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 10%
Social Sciences 10 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 4%
Sports and Recreations 3 3%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 31 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,536,007
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Social Science & Medicine
#9,554
of 11,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,802
of 274,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Social Science & Medicine
#103
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,076 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.