Exploring the weight bias of professionals working in the field of obesity with a mobile IAT: a pilot study.
Implicit Association Test
ResearchKit
implicit bias
obesity
weight bias
Journal
Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism
ISSN: 2042-0188
Titre abrégé: Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101532143
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
08
10
2021
accepted:
19
04
2022
entrez:
20
5
2022
pubmed:
21
5
2022
medline:
21
5
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Obesity is common in many industrialized nations and often accompanied by related health issues. Furthermore, individuals living with overweight or obesity are often confronted with stigmatization in their daily lives. These problems may be aggravated if the objectivity of health care professionals is compromised due to (unconscious) prejudices. If pharmaceutical companies, regulatory agencies, and health insurers are also susceptible to these biases, decisions related to the development, approval, and reimbursement of obesity-related therapies may be negatively impacted. The 'Implicit Association Test' (IAT) is a psychometric test allowing to measure these attitudes and could therefore assist to reveal unconscious preferences. A self-developed mobile version, in the form of a ResearchKit-based IAT app was employed in the presented study. The objective was to determine (potential) weight bias and its characteristics for professionals attending a national obesity-related conference in Germany (G1), compared to a control group (without stated interest in the topic, G2) - both using the mobile app - and a historical control (G3) based on data provided by Project Implicit acquired by a web app. Explicit evaluations of G1 were neutral at a higher percentage compared with G2 and G3, while implicit preference toward lean individuals did not differ significantly between G2 and G3, and G1. The greater discrepancy between the (more neutral) explicit attitude and the unconscious preference pointing in the anti-obesity direction could indicate an underestimated bias for the professional participants in G1. Implicit preference is often ingrained from childhood on, and difficult to overcome. Thus, even for professionals, it may unconsciously influence decisions made in the care they provide. Professionals in any given health care sector directed at obesity care should thus be made aware of this inconsistency to enable them to consciously counteract this potential effect.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Obesity is common in many industrialized nations and often accompanied by related health issues. Furthermore, individuals living with overweight or obesity are often confronted with stigmatization in their daily lives. These problems may be aggravated if the objectivity of health care professionals is compromised due to (unconscious) prejudices. If pharmaceutical companies, regulatory agencies, and health insurers are also susceptible to these biases, decisions related to the development, approval, and reimbursement of obesity-related therapies may be negatively impacted.
Materials and Methods
UNASSIGNED
The 'Implicit Association Test' (IAT) is a psychometric test allowing to measure these attitudes and could therefore assist to reveal unconscious preferences. A self-developed mobile version, in the form of a ResearchKit-based IAT app was employed in the presented study. The objective was to determine (potential) weight bias and its characteristics for professionals attending a national obesity-related conference in Germany (G1), compared to a control group (without stated interest in the topic, G2) - both using the mobile app - and a historical control (G3) based on data provided by Project Implicit acquired by a web app.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Explicit evaluations of G1 were neutral at a higher percentage compared with G2 and G3, while implicit preference toward lean individuals did not differ significantly between G2 and G3, and G1.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
The greater discrepancy between the (more neutral) explicit attitude and the unconscious preference pointing in the anti-obesity direction could indicate an underestimated bias for the professional participants in G1. Implicit preference is often ingrained from childhood on, and difficult to overcome. Thus, even for professionals, it may unconsciously influence decisions made in the care they provide. Professionals in any given health care sector directed at obesity care should thus be made aware of this inconsistency to enable them to consciously counteract this potential effect.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35592657
doi: 10.1177/20420188221098881
pii: 10.1177_20420188221098881
pmc: PMC9112301
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
20420188221098881Informations de copyright
© The Author(s), 2022.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest statement: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Références
Int J Obes (Lond). 2007 Feb;31(2):308-14
pubmed: 16733526
Obes Facts. 2010 Feb;3(1):47-58
pubmed: 20215795
Health Informatics J. 2022 Jan-Mar;28(1):14604582211065702
pubmed: 34986689
Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2001 Oct;25(10):1525-31
pubmed: 11673776
Res Nurs Health. 2018 Dec;41(6):525-534
pubmed: 30302768
Obesity (Silver Spring). 2021 Nov;29(11):1802-1812
pubmed: 34490738
Clin Diabetes. 2016 Jan;34(1):44-50
pubmed: 26807008
J Pers. 2015 Feb;83(1):56-68
pubmed: 24299075
Obesity (Silver Spring). 2015 Jan;23(1):46-53
pubmed: 25294247
J Adv Nurs. 2019 Dec;75(12):3631-3642
pubmed: 31566770
Int J Obes (Lond). 2008 Jun;32(6):959-66
pubmed: 18283284
Exp Psychol. 2004;51(3):165-79
pubmed: 15267125
J Am Assoc Nurse Pract. 2016 Mar;28(3):125-9
pubmed: 26178582
Stress Health. 2018 Oct;34(4):509-522
pubmed: 29790653
Int J Mol Sci. 2019 Mar 06;20(5):
pubmed: 30845725
Obes Res. 2003 Sep;11(9):1033-9
pubmed: 12972672
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2001 Apr;80(4):645-54
pubmed: 11316227
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2017 Jan;43(1):46-59
pubmed: 28903648
Psychol Rev. 1995 Jan;102(1):4-27
pubmed: 7878162
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003 Jan;57(1):68-73
pubmed: 12490652
J Nurs Educ. 2014 Jun;53(6):320-8
pubmed: 25033489
Obesity (Silver Spring). 2014 Apr;22(4):1201-8
pubmed: 24375989
Int J Obes (Lond). 2015 Jul;39(7):1166-73
pubmed: 25809827
AIMS Public Health. 2015 Mar 11;2(1):56-63
pubmed: 29546095
Obesity (Silver Spring). 2014 May;22(5):1380-6
pubmed: 24788572
Acad Med. 2013 Jul;88(7):978-82
pubmed: 23702519
Front Digit Health. 2022 Mar 18;4:785591
pubmed: 35373181
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2021 Mar;16(2):396-414
pubmed: 31647752
Health Psychol. 2003 Jan;22(1):68-78
pubmed: 12558204
Annu Rev Psychol. 2006;57:529-55
pubmed: 16318606
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998 Jun;74(6):1464-80
pubmed: 9654756
Obes Surg. 2020 May;30(5):1623-1624
pubmed: 32193742
Psychol Sci. 2019 Feb;30(2):174-192
pubmed: 30605364
J Clin Nurs. 2012 Dec;21(23-24):3504-12
pubmed: 22985408
PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e48448
pubmed: 23144885
Health Educ Res. 2008 Apr;23(2):347-58
pubmed: 17884836
Obes Facts. 2018;11(6):501-513
pubmed: 30537717
Am Psychol. 2020 Feb-Mar;75(2):274-289
pubmed: 32053000
Int J Obes (Lond). 2016 May;40(5):883-6
pubmed: 26841729
Healthcare (Basel). 2019 Sep 12;7(3):
pubmed: 31547359
Front Hum Neurosci. 2011 Mar 04;5:23
pubmed: 21442042
Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2021 Oct 07;14:4169-4175
pubmed: 34675711