Communicating Inequalities to Enhance Support for Obesity-Prevention Policies: The Role of Social Comparisons, Age Frames, and Emotion

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

With certain populations in the United States at higher risk for obesity than other populations, public health advocates have attempted to draw attention to these inequalities to galvanize support for obesity-mitigation policies. Yet research comparing different messages about social inequalities indicates that not all social comparisons are persuasive. Drawing on Weiner’s (1986) theory of perceived responsibility and social motivation, I experimentally tested promising message frames about obesity disparities. Participants (N = 653) read one of six messages following a 3 (social comparison frame: geographic vs. racial vs. no-comparison) × 2 (age frame: child vs. adult) between-subjects design. Unexpectedly, geographic frames (rural/urban) indirectly decreased policy support relative to the control frame by way of increased counterarguing. Compared to adult frames about obesity inequalities, childhood frames evoked more sympathy and less internal attribution, which in turn positively predicted support for obesity-prevention policies. Practical and theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)227-237
Number of pages11
JournalHealth Communication
Volume34
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 28 2019

Fingerprint

Public health
Emotions
emotion
Obesity
sympathy
social inequality
attribution
Pediatric Obesity
public health
childhood
Population
Motivation
responsibility
Public Health
Research

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Health(social science)
  • Communication

Cite this

@article{74fd08ad4b80427ab160a0129ac1a12b,
title = "Communicating Inequalities to Enhance Support for Obesity-Prevention Policies: The Role of Social Comparisons, Age Frames, and Emotion",
abstract = "With certain populations in the United States at higher risk for obesity than other populations, public health advocates have attempted to draw attention to these inequalities to galvanize support for obesity-mitigation policies. Yet research comparing different messages about social inequalities indicates that not all social comparisons are persuasive. Drawing on Weiner’s (1986) theory of perceived responsibility and social motivation, I experimentally tested promising message frames about obesity disparities. Participants (N = 653) read one of six messages following a 3 (social comparison frame: geographic vs. racial vs. no-comparison) × 2 (age frame: child vs. adult) between-subjects design. Unexpectedly, geographic frames (rural/urban) indirectly decreased policy support relative to the control frame by way of increased counterarguing. Compared to adult frames about obesity inequalities, childhood frames evoked more sympathy and less internal attribution, which in turn positively predicted support for obesity-prevention policies. Practical and theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.",
author = "Christofer Skurka",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "28",
doi = "10.1080/10410236.2017.1405477",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "34",
pages = "227--237",
journal = "Health Communication",
issn = "1041-0236",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Communicating Inequalities to Enhance Support for Obesity-Prevention Policies

T2 - The Role of Social Comparisons, Age Frames, and Emotion

AU - Skurka, Christofer

PY - 2019/1/28

Y1 - 2019/1/28

N2 - With certain populations in the United States at higher risk for obesity than other populations, public health advocates have attempted to draw attention to these inequalities to galvanize support for obesity-mitigation policies. Yet research comparing different messages about social inequalities indicates that not all social comparisons are persuasive. Drawing on Weiner’s (1986) theory of perceived responsibility and social motivation, I experimentally tested promising message frames about obesity disparities. Participants (N = 653) read one of six messages following a 3 (social comparison frame: geographic vs. racial vs. no-comparison) × 2 (age frame: child vs. adult) between-subjects design. Unexpectedly, geographic frames (rural/urban) indirectly decreased policy support relative to the control frame by way of increased counterarguing. Compared to adult frames about obesity inequalities, childhood frames evoked more sympathy and less internal attribution, which in turn positively predicted support for obesity-prevention policies. Practical and theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.

AB - With certain populations in the United States at higher risk for obesity than other populations, public health advocates have attempted to draw attention to these inequalities to galvanize support for obesity-mitigation policies. Yet research comparing different messages about social inequalities indicates that not all social comparisons are persuasive. Drawing on Weiner’s (1986) theory of perceived responsibility and social motivation, I experimentally tested promising message frames about obesity disparities. Participants (N = 653) read one of six messages following a 3 (social comparison frame: geographic vs. racial vs. no-comparison) × 2 (age frame: child vs. adult) between-subjects design. Unexpectedly, geographic frames (rural/urban) indirectly decreased policy support relative to the control frame by way of increased counterarguing. Compared to adult frames about obesity inequalities, childhood frames evoked more sympathy and less internal attribution, which in turn positively predicted support for obesity-prevention policies. Practical and theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85035117181&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85035117181&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10410236.2017.1405477

DO - 10.1080/10410236.2017.1405477

M3 - Article

C2 - 29182370

AN - SCOPUS:85035117181

VL - 34

SP - 227

EP - 237

JO - Health Communication

JF - Health Communication

SN - 1041-0236

IS - 2

ER -