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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Food Addiction and Its Impact on Weight-Based Stigma and the Treatment of Obese Individuals in the U.S. and Australia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nutrients, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3390/nu6115312 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Natalia M. Lee, Wayne D. Hall, Jayne Lucke, Cynthia Forlini, Adrian Carter |
| Abstract |
It is argued that food addiction explanations of obesity may reduce the significant stigma levelled at obese and overweight individuals. We surveyed 479 adults to determine the prevalence of food addiction in the U.S. (n = 215) and, for the first time, in Australia (n = 264) using the Yale Food Addiction Scale (YFAS). We also assessed the level of weight-based stigma in this population. The prevalence of food addiction in our Australian sample was 11%, similar to U.S. participants and consistent with previous studies. Those who met criteria for diagnosis had a larger mean BMI (33.8 kg/m2) than those who did not (26.5 kg/m2). Overall, the level of stigma towards others was low and differed significantly based on BMI, predominately among normal weight and obese participants (p = 0.0036). Obese individuals scored higher on certain measures of stigma, possibly reflecting individual experiences of stigma rather than negative attitudes towards other obese individuals (p = 0.0091). Despite significant support for a "food addiction" explanation of obesity, participants still valued personal responsibility in overcoming obesity and did not support coercive approaches to treat their "addiction". |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 93 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 18 | 19% |
| Unknown | 26 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 22 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 29 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 01 August 2021.
All research outputs
#3,925,982
of 24,520,187 outputs
Outputs from Nutrients
#7,410
of 20,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,611
of 372,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrients
#43
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,520,187 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,180 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
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 372,186 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.