PSY1010 Colorado State Research Methodology General Psychology Critique This assignment provides you with an opportunity to analyze a real-world, peer-revi

PSY1010 Colorado State Research Methodology General Psychology Critique This assignment provides you with an opportunity to analyze a real-world, peer-reviewed psychology journal article. You should find an article containing research that examines motivation, emotion, and social psychology.

Begin by visiting the CSU Online Library to locate and choose a journal article in which motivation and emotion are viewed under the lens of social psychology. The article must be peer-reviewed and should be no older than 7 years.

A good place to start your search is the PsycARTICLES database or the Academic Search Complete database. You can access these databases from the Databases box on the library homepage.

For assistance in locating your article, you may find the following tutorial How to Find Journal Articles helpful. Additionally, you may find thisHow to Search in PsycARTICLES document useful.

Once you have chosen your article, you will write an article critique that addresses the following elements.

Explain the research methodology that was used in the study.
Discuss social factors that influence people or groups to conform to the actions of others.
Indicate how behaviors and motivation are impacted by the presence of others.
Indicate the structures of the brain that are involved in emotion and motivation.
Examine the article’s generalizability to various areas of psychology.

In addition, your article critique should clearly identify the article’s premise and present an insightful and thorough analysis with strong arguments and evidence. You should present your own informed and substantiated opinion on the article’s content. You must use at least one source in addition to your chosen article to support your analysis and opinion.

Your article critique must be a minimum of two pages in length, not including the title and reference pages. All sources used must be properly cited. Your article critique, including all references, must be formatted in APA style. Stigma and Health
Discussing Weight With Patients With Overweight:
Supportive (Not Stigmatizing) Conversations Increase
Compliance Intentions and Health Motivation
Lydia E. Hayward, Sammantha Neang, Samuel Ma, and Lenny R. Vartanian
Online First Publication, May 6, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/sah0000173
CITATION
Hayward, L. E., Neang, S., Ma, S., & Vartanian, L. R. (2019, May 6). Discussing Weight With Patients
With Overweight: Supportive (Not Stigmatizing) Conversations Increase Compliance Intentions
and Health Motivation. Stigma and Health. Advance online publication.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/sah0000173
Stigma and Health
© 2019 American Psychological Association
2376-6972/19/$12.00
2019, Vol. 1, No. 999, 000
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/sah0000173
Discussing Weight With Patients With Overweight: Supportive
(Not Stigmatizing) Conversations Increase Compliance Intentions and
Health Motivation
Lydia E. Hayward, Sammantha Neang, Samuel Ma, and Lenny R. Vartanian
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
University of New South Wales Sydney
Health care providers play an important role in the management of obesity; however, they often hold
negative attitudes about people with overweight and obesity and this may affect the treatment that they
provide. The current studies assessed how doctor communication style around discussions of weight
(supportive vs. stigmatizing) impacted participants’ health motivation and willingness to comply with the
doctor’s advice. We conducted 2 online studies in which we presented participants who self-identified as
either overweight or obese with a written scenario describing a doctor-patient interaction. Study 1 (N ?
334) revealed that participants who read a supportive interaction reported more positive affect and greater
health motivation than did participants who read a nonweight control interaction. In contrast, participants
who read a stigmatizing conversation about weight reported less positive affect and more negative affect
and reported lower willingness to comply with the doctor’s recommendations than did control participants. Study 2 (N ? 332) revealed that a weight stigmatizing interaction had harmful consequences for
compliance and health motivation regardless of how extreme the doctor’s health behavior recommendations were. Together these findings suggest that a stigmatizing discussion about weight can negatively
impact health motivation and compliance, but that conversations about weight can also be productive if
they are conducted in a supportive and empathetic manner.
Keywords: obesity, weight stigma, health care, health motivation
People with overweight and obesity experience health care
differently than do those with a lower BMI. Higher BMI is
associated with greater reported avoidance of health care (Alegria
Drury & Louis, 2002). Among women with overweight, those
most likely to have avoided routine preventative procedures such
as cancer screenings were those in the highest BMI categories
(Adams, Smith, Wilbur, & Grady, 1993; Amy, Aalborg, Lyons, &
Keranen, 2006). Patients with obesity cite both past experiences of
disrespectful treatment from providers and concerns over how
their weight will be discussed and managed in future as reasons for
avoiding or delaying health care (Alegria Drury & Louis, 2002;
Amy et al., 2006). These concerns appear valid—many people
with overweight and obesity report experiencing weight stigma in
health care settings (Ferrante et al., 2016; Mulherin, Miller, Barlow, Diedrichs, & Thompson, 2013; Puhl & Brownell, 2006; Puhl
& Heuer, 2009; Richard, Ferguson, Lara, Leonard, & Younis,
2014). Health care providers build less emotional rapport with
patients with overweight and obesity (Gudzune, Beach, Roter, &
Cooper, 2013), spend less time providing them with health education (Bertakis & Azari, 2005), and report having less respect for
them (Huizinga, Cooper, Bleich, Clark, & Beach, 2009). Providers
also engage in less patient-centered care with patients who they
perceive are unlikely to be adherent (Street, Gordon, & Haidet,
2007), a stereotype often attributed to patients with obesity (Foster
et al., 2003).
Experiences with weight-based stigmatization can negatively
impact patients’ health and well-being. There is substantial evidence that experiencing weight stigma (in general) is associated
Health care providers have an important role to play in the
management of obesity. To do so, they need to be able to discuss
the topic of weight with their patients with overweight and obesity.
Unfortunately, people with a higher body mass index (BMI) may
delay or avoid health care, often citing concerns about how the
provider will treat them because of their weight (Alegria Drury &
Louis, 2002). Indeed, many people with overweight and obesity
report experiences of weight-based stigma in health care contexts
(Puhl & Brownell, 2006). Moreover, considerable evidence suggests that experiencing weight stigma is associated with poorer
well-being and reduced motivation to engage in healthy lifestyle
behaviors (Puhl & Suh, 2015). Thus, even when people with
overweight and obesity seek health care, they may not be receiving
advice in a manner that motivates behavior change. Understanding
how provider communication style affects motivations and perceptions among individuals with overweight and obesity is an
important step in determining how to best enhance the mental and
physical health of people with overweight and obesity.
Lydia E. Hayward, Sammantha Neang, Samuel Ma, and Lenny R.
Vartanian, School of Psychology, University of New South Wales Sydney.
The data that are published in this article have been made available at
https://osf.io/3f4xh/.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Lydia E.
Hayward, School of Psychology, University of New South Wales Sydney,
NSW 2052, Australia. E-mail: lydia.hayward@unsw.edu.au
1
HAYWARD, NEANG, MA, AND VARTANIAN
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
2
with poorer psychological well-being (Chen et al., 2007; Friedman
et al., 2005; Himmelstein, Puhl, & Quinn, 2018; Juvonen, Lessard,
Schacter, & Suchilt, 2017), as well as lower motivation to engage
in health behaviors and lose weight, higher caloric intake, greater
exercise avoidance, and more engagement in unhealthy weightcontrol behaviors (Major, Eliezer, & Rieck, 2012; Major, Hunger,
Bunyan, & Miller, 2014; Puhl & Suh, 2015; Schvey, Puhl, &
Brownell, 2011; Tomiyama, 2014; Vartanian, Pinkus, & Smyth,
2018; Vartanian & Porter, 2016; Vartanian & Shaprow, 2008). In
the health care context specifically, there is evidence that patients
with overweight and obesity who feel judged about their weight by
their health care provider are less likely to trust their provider and
are less likely to achieve weight loss (Gudzune, Bennett, Cooper,
& Bleich, 2014a, 2014b). Moreover, poor provider-patient communication is associated with lower intentions to engage in health
behaviors (Jay, Gillespie, Schlair, Sherman, & Kalet, 2010) and
reduced compliance (Zolnierek & Dimatteo, 2009). Thus, health
care providers risk worsening the health of their patients with
overweight and obesity if they discuss weight in a manner that is
perceived as stigmatizing.
Of course, health care providers do not set out to worsen the
health of their patients, so why might they be engaging in weight
stigmatizing behavior? There is substantial evidence that health
care providers hold negative attitudes toward people with overweight and obesity (Sabin, Marini, & Nosek, 2012) and hold
negative stereotypes about them, viewing them as weak-willed,
noncompliant, awkward, sloppy, and lazy (Foster et al., 2003).
These negative attitudes and stereotypes can affect the care that
doctors provide. Some providers also express concern about raising the topic of weight with their patients, citing as their primary
worry a degree of uncertainty about how patients will react emotionally to the message (Michie, 2007). Only a small number of
health care providers report receiving good training in obesity
practices (Forman-Hoffman, Little, & Wahls, 2006). However,
those who receive adequate training are more likely to report
discussing diet and exercise with their patients with obesity, and
patients who receive weight loss advice from their doctors are
more likely to report engaging in attempts to lose weight (Galuska,
Will, Serdula, & Ford, 1999; Rose, Poynter, Anderson, Noar, &
Conigliaro, 2013). Physician communication about weight, therefore, appears to be an important factor in promoting health behaviors among individuals with obesity, but the nature of that communication is also an important consideration.
The Present Studies
Given the evidence that quality of communication around
weight may be important, the present studies aimed to examine
how different types of physician-patient discussions about weight
might affect health motivation and compliance among people with
overweight and obesity. Study 1 investigated whether doctors may
be able to promote intentions to engage in health behaviors by
discussing weight in a supportive manner, as well as whether
stigmatizing doctor-patient interactions about weight might impair
patient health motivation and compliance. Study 2 manipulated
both the communication style and the extremity of the health
behavior changes recommended by the doctor so that we could
determine whether the communication style of the doctor impacts
compliance intentions and motivation irrespective of what advice
the doctor gives.
Study 1
Participants who identified as overweight or obese were presented with one of three hypothetical scenarios that described an
interaction between a patient and their doctor: a supportive discussion about the patient’s weight, a weight stigmatizing interaction, or a control scenario in which weight was not discussed.
Participants imagined themselves as the patient in the scenario and
then completed a series of outcome measure. We hypothesized that
people who read about being stigmatized by a doctor about their
weight would report lower compliance intentions, motivation to
engage in health behaviors, and willingness to visit the doctor
again, as well as rate the doctor more negatively, than would those
who read about a supportive discussion about weight or a nonweight discussion. We also hypothesized that reading a supportive
discussion about weight would increase motivation, compliance,
and willingness to visit the doctor again, as well as produce more
positive perceptions of the doctor, compared with the nonweight
discussion. Finally, we explored whether positive affect and negative affect would mediate these effects.
Method
Participants. Participants were U.S. residents recruited online
via Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk), a website where people
can complete online surveys for monetary reimbursement. In September 2017, participants were invited to complete a prescreening
survey that assessed age, sex, relationship status, and weight status
(underweight/normal weight/overweight/obese), and were reimbursed USD$0.05 (N ? 706). People who selected their weight
status as “overweight” or “obese” were then invited to participate
in the full 15-min study for an additional USD$1.50 (n ? 350). A
final sample of 334 participants provided consent and completed
the online study, and there were no exclusions. The majority of the
sample identified as female (61.1%); all other participants identified as male. Participants had a mean age of 37.55 (SD ? 10.74)
and a mean BMI of 33.34 kg/m2 (based on self-reported height and
weight; SD ? 6.72; range ? 24.21–63.56). According to the
World Health Organization, a BMI of between 25 and 30 is
classified as overweight (34.1% of participants in the current
study) and a BMI of 30 or above is classified as obese (62.9% of
participants). Ten participants had a BMI ?25 but excluding these
participants did not substantially change the results so we have
reported analyses below using the full sample. The majority of the
sample had self-identified as overweight in the prescreening survey (68.6%), with less than one third identifying as obese (31.4%).
Participants had an average self-reported socioeconomic status of
4.64 (SD ? 1.54) out of 10 (with 10 being the highest status) and
the majority of participants (71.6%) had completed at least some
university or college. Demographics did not differ between conditions (ps ? .114).
Procedure. After providing informed consent, participants
were asked to read a transcript of a doctor-patient interaction and
imagine themselves as the patient in the scenario. Participants were
randomly allocated to read about either: a supportive interaction
about weight with the doctor (n ? 111), a stigmatizing interaction
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
DOCTOR-PATIENT CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WEIGHT
about weight with the doctor (n ? 112), or a control interaction in
which the patient described a wrist injury and there was no
mention of weight (n ? 111). Excluding 11 participants who spent
less than 20 s on the page where the scenario was presented did not
change the pattern of the results; thus, the results are presented
below for all participants. After reading through the transcript,
participants completed the following measures in order: affect,
perceptions of the doctor, motivation to engage in health behaviors, willingness to comply with the doctor’s recommendations,
and willingness to visit either the doctor described in the scenario
again or any doctor. Participants then completed trait level individual difference measures (past experience with weight stigma in
general, past experience of weight stigma in the context of health
care, weight stigma concerns, internalized weight bias, and fat
identification) that were included as potential moderators. No
consistent evidence of moderation was found for any of these
variables, and these results are, therefore, not reported in this
article. Finally, participants provided demographic information
and then read a debriefing statement. This research was approved
by the university’s ethics committee. The data have been made
publicly available at https://osf.io/3f4xh/.
Stimuli and measures.
Manipulation stimuli. The supportive and stigmatizing interaction scenarios were derived from videos that are freely available
at http://whyweightguide.org/videos.php. These videos have been
developed as teaching tools for health care professionals, providing instruction on: (a) how to have a productive conversation with
a patient about their weight, and (b) what not to do when discussing a patient’s weight. We transcribed these videos and then used
part of the transcription as our supportive and stigmatizing interactions, respectively. For the control condition, we attempted to
keep as many details as possible consistent with the weight-based
interactions but, instead of discussing weight, the scenario centered around the patient complaining of a sore wrist. All scenarios
began toward the end of a visit to the doctor, making it clear that
the issue being discussed in the scenario (weight/wrist pain) was
not the primary purpose of the visit to the doctor. In all conditions,
the doctor recommended some form of treatment for the issue
raised. The doctor in the stigmatizing condition recommended
calorie restriction and frequent intensive exercise, the doctor in the
supportive condition recommended short bursts of gentle exercise
(walking), and the doctor in the control condition recommended
wearing a light brace on the wrist and rest. See Appendix A for the
full transcripts.
Manipulation checks. One manipulation check question was
asked immediately after participants read the interaction: “On a
scale from negative to positive, how would you rate this interaction
with the doctor?” (1 ? very negative, 4 ? neutral, 7 ? very
positive). Another manipulation check question was asked at the
very end of the survey, before the demographic questions: “How
critical or supportive do you feel that the doctor was toward the
patient? (1 ? very critical, 4 ? neither critical nor supportive/
neutral, 7 ? very supportive).
Affect. Participants were reminded to imagine that the interaction they had read about had just happened to them, and were
asked to indicate how they were feeling at that very moment with
regards to a range of emotions: embarrassed/angry/sad/anxious/
ashamed (negative affect; ? ? .95), and happy/hopeful/confident/
proud/grateful (positive affect; ? ? .93). These measures were
3
adapted from those used by Vartanian et al. (2018) to assess
positive and negative affect in response to weight stigma, but with
some additional items included to assess a wider range of emotions. Participants responded to each item on a sliding scale ranging from 0 ? not at all to 100 ? very much so. The order of the
items was randomized.
Health motivation. Three items assessed how motivated participants currently felt to: exercise or be physically active, diet or
eat healthy, and try to lose weight (Vartanian et al., 2018), rated on
a sliding scale ranging from 0 ? not at all to 100 ? very much so
(? ? .96).
Positive perceptions of the doctor. Participants completed the
10-item Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) scale (Mercer, Maxwell, Heaney, & Watt, 2004), rating how well the doctor
performed according to a range of criteria (e.g., “making you feel
at ease,” or “fully understanding your concerns”; 1 ? poor to 5 ?
excellent; ? ? .98).
Compliance. Three items adapted from Puhl, Wharton, and
Heuer (2009) assessed participants’ understanding of and compliance with the recommendations provided by the doctor in the
scenario: “How well do you understand the recommendations?”
(1 ? very little to 5 ? very much), “How likely are you to be
compliant with the treatment recommended?”, and “How likely do
you think you are to be successful in making the suggested
changes and maintaining them over time?” (1 ? very unlikely to
5 ? very likely; ? ? .80).
Willingness to visit doctors. One item assessed the likelihood
that participants would visit the doctor described in the scenario
again if they required medical attention. Another item assessed the
likelihood that participants would visit any doctor if required. Both
items used a response scale of 1 ? very unlikely to 5 ? very likely
and were analyzed separately.
Analytic plan. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)
was conducted on each outcome variable. We then ran a series of
parallel mediation models using PROCESS (Hayes, 2013) Model
4 to examine whether positive and negative affect mediated the
effects of condition on the outcomes. Indicator coding was used for
the multicategorical predictor variable, with the control condition
designated as the reference category. One contrast examined the
stigmatizing condition relative to the control condition, and the
other contrast examined the supportive condition relative to control condition. Both contrasts were included as predictor variables,
positive affect and negative affect were included as simultaneous
mediators, and each outcome was examined separately. Unstandardized indirect effects and 95% bias-corrected bootstrapped confidence intervals (CIs) with 5,000 samples are reported.
Results
Table 1 reports the descriptive statistic…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment