Psychology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
School of Psychology, Aston University, Birmingham, UK.
Int J Obes (Lond). 2022 Jul;46(7):1288-1294. doi: 10.1038/s41366-022-01109-z. Epub 2022 Mar 25.
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Cross-sectional research has demonstrated weight-related stigma and discrimination, however experimental research providing causal evidence of financial-based weight discrimination is lacking. The aim of these preregistered experiments was to examine whether a novel paradigm in which participants attributed financial rewards and punishments could be used to detect weight bias.
SUBJECTS/METHODS: One-hundred and twenty-one individuals participated in experiment 1 and one-hundred and sixty-six individuals participated in experiment 2. Both studies were conducted online, and participants were provided with biographies of hypothetical individuals in which weight-status was manipulated (normal weight vs. overweight/obesity) before being asked to provide rewards and punishments on their cognitive performance. In experiment 1 (within-participants design) participants observed one individual they believed to be normal weight and one individual they believed to be overweight/have obesity. In experiment 2 (between-participants design) participants observed one individual whilst also being provided with information about food addiction (Food addiction is real + individual with overweight/obesity vs. food addiction is a myth + individual with overweight/obesity vs control + individual with normal weight).
In experiment 1, participants punished individuals who were described as having overweight/obesity to a greater extent to individuals who were normal weight (Hedge's g = -0.21 [95% CI: -0.02 to -0.41], p = 0.026), but there was no effect on rewards. They were also less likely to recommend individuals with overweight/obesity to pass the tasks (X(1) = 10.05, p = 0.002). In experiment 2, participants rewarded individuals whom they believed were overweight/obese to a lesser extent than normal-weight individuals (g = 0.49 [95% CI: 0.16 to 0.83]. There was no effect on punishment, nor any impact of information regarding food addiction as real vs a myth.
Using a novel discrimination task, these two experiments demonstrate causal evidence of weight-based discrimination in financial decision making.
背景/目的：横断面研究已经证明了与体重相关的耻辱感和歧视，但缺乏提供基于财务的体重歧视的因果证据的实验研究。这些预先注册实验的目的是检验一种新的范式，即参与者归因于财务奖励和惩罚，是否可以用来检测体重偏见。
受试者/方法：121 名参与者参加了实验 1，166 名参与者参加了实验 2。这两项研究都是在网上进行的，参与者在被要求对他们的认知表现进行奖励和惩罚之前，先阅读关于假设个体的传记，其中体重状况是被操纵的（正常体重与超重/肥胖）。在实验 1（被试内设计）中，参与者观察了一个他们认为是正常体重的个体和一个他们认为是超重/肥胖的个体。在实验 2（被试间设计）中，参与者观察了一个个体，同时也获得了关于食物成瘾的信息（食物成瘾是真实的+超重/肥胖个体与食物成瘾是一个神话+超重/肥胖个体与控制个体+正常体重个体）。
在实验 1 中，参与者对被描述为超重/肥胖的个体的惩罚程度明显大于对正常体重个体的惩罚程度（Hedge's g=-0.21 [95%CI：-0.02 至-0.41]，p=0.026），但对奖励没有影响。他们也不太可能推荐超重/肥胖个体通过任务（X(1)=10.05，p=0.002）。在实验 2 中，参与者对他们认为超重/肥胖的个体的奖励程度明显低于对正常体重个体的奖励程度（g=0.49 [95%CI：0.16 至 0.83]）。对惩罚没有影响，也没有关于食物成瘾是真实还是神话的信息的影响。
使用一种新的歧视任务，这两项实验提供了体重歧视在财务决策中的因果证据。
