1. INTRODUCTION
Behavioral treatments for weight loss and weight‐related behaviors increasingly leverage commercially available health‐focused mobile applications (i.e., “apps”) to assist participants in changing weight‐related behaviors (e.g., monitoring caloric intake, body weight, and physical activity).1, 2 This includes weight loss treatments in which the content and behavior change tools are delivered entirely through a single mobile application (e.g., Noom or WW) as well as mobile applications that can act as adjuncts to existing programs to assist participants with making changes to specific weight‐related behaviors (i.e., monitoring caloric intake, body weight, and physical activity). The benefits of using commercial mobile apps to augment obesity treatments are evident: these apps are widely available, easily accessed, and portable. 3 As such, apps have potential to improve adherence to weight‐related behaviors and enhance engagement.1, 2, 4 As app usage and variety expands, 5 researchers have begun investigating and expressing concern about the lack of evidence‐based strategies incorporated into commercially available apps in particular.1, 2, 4 However, this work has not examined one topic that may have crucial implications for the utility of apps: weight‐related stigmatization.
Weight‐related stigmatization refers to social devaluation of an individual based on body weight through negative stereotyping (e.g., being lazy, unintelligent, and lacking self‐control). 6 It is perpetuated in a number of ways including, but not limited to, media portrayals of individuals of higher body weight, overt discrimination, language, and environmental barriers. 6 Weight‐related stigma is pervasive as it remains a socially acceptable form of bias.6, 7 As such, the possibility exists that stigma may be unintentionally embedded into health‐focused apps via language, images, and functionality. Despite beliefs by some that these experiences will motivate individuals to be healthier, growing evidence indicates that weight‐related stigma can interfere with achieving or maintaining a healthy weight through mechanisms such as elevated physiological stress, reduced motivation, obesogenic eating behaviors, exercise avoidance, and reduced access to healthcare.6, 7
Weight‐stigmatizing experiences can have a lasting influence on subsequent health behaviors (e.g., as a result of experiencing weight stigma, individuals might avoid exercise or engage in eating behaviors that are inconsistent with goals). 6 Thus, apps that have weight stigmatization unintentionally embedded within them may de‐incentivize behavior change and/or cause emotional distress. This is problematic because: (1) apps have massive reach 8 and (2) apps have potential to reach a population that may already feel stigmatized for their weight or other characteristics.
To illustrate, consider a user who has entered data reflecting low levels of physical activity and then receives automated feedback including language describing performance as “lazy” or “slacking off”. While perhaps attempting to be light‐hearted and colloquial, this language reinforces negative stereotypes about individuals of higher body weight; namely that they do not exercise and are sedentary (and thus may negate any constructive suggestions that follow). These stereotypes are compounded by the pervasiveness of anti‐fat attitudes among exercise professionals, 9 assumptions that individuals of higher body weight are unmotivated or unable to exercise,9, 10 and also by factors signaling that individuals with larger bodies are not welcome within physical activity spaces due to equipment that cannot accommodate their size or by treatment from others. 11 This weight stigmatizing language is embedded in the context of an evidence‐based strategy as self‐monitoring of exercise behavior and receiving feedback is not only theoretically grounded but empirically supported as an effective tool for behavior change.
However, the presence of weight stigma in commercially available apps used for weight loss has received minimal investigation. To begin generating awareness and informing future research in this important area, Table 1 provides examples of content within currently existing apps which may be perceived as stigmatizing. Extensive work has been conducted to define, document, and investigate the consequences of weight stigma in non‐virtual settings. 6 The examples provided in Table 1 draw on this existing work to highlight how weight stigma that has been documented across settings, in real life, can be perpetuated within technology via apps. Table content includes a description and explanation of potentially weight stigmatizing content (which can be found in the second and third columns), citations supporting the stigmatizing nature of this content, and each example is labeled with a corresponding evidence‐based strategy(ies) to demonstrate how this content can occur within the context of utilizing evidence‐based practice.
TABLE 1.
Illustrative examples of content within currently existing smartphone applications that could be perceived as weight stigmatizing
| Evidence‐based strategy a | Example of weight stigmatizing content within App | Explanation of why this could be stigmatizing conceptually |
|---|---|---|
| Self‐monitoring and feedback | Based on physical activity level, step count, or duration of activity, individual receives feedback that they have been “lazy” or “slacking off” |
|
| Self‐monitoring and feedback | Based on quality of food intake or calories reported, individual receives feedback that they can have “better control” of their health/choices tomorrow. |
|
| Self‐monitoring and feedback | Individual enters food into tracking system and receives feedback that an item was a “C‐.” | |
| Goal setting and planning/self‐monitoring and feedback | Based on body weight, eating, or exercise behavior, the individual receives feedback that they can be a “better” version of themselves by losing weight or changing weight‐related behaviors. |
|
| Goal setting and planning/rewards and incentives/social components | Individual is asked to participate in a “beach body” challenge, or is given motivational feedback to keeping working for their “beach body.” |
|
| Goal setting and planning | Individual enters their height and weight and is given feedback based on BMI that does not portray the nuances of BMI as an assessment tool or marker of health. |
|
| Goal setting and planning | Stock photos or avatars embedded within App feature only thin and/or fit bodies. |
|
| Goal setting and planning | Planning features of the App encourage individual to “imagine getting rid of all the fat on your thighs, stomach, etc.” when trying to resist tempting foods. |
|
| Social components | Receiving or sending a “taunt” message from peers in relation to physical activity tracking. |
|
Note: Each example includes discussion regarding how the content could reinforce weight bias and that these experiences can be embedded within evidence‐based strategies for weight loss.
Evidence based‐features/categories were taken from Pagoto S, Schneider K, Jojic M, DeBiasse M, & Mann D. (2013). Evidence‐based strategies in weight‐loss mobile apps. Am J Prev Med;45(5):576‐582.a
The table provides multiple examples of stigmatizing content evident in these apps, including but not limited to using stigmatizing labels, reinforcing stereotypes associated with overweight and obesity, and promoting an unrealistic thin ideal and equating it with positive health status. Because some examples may be more intuitive than others, an explanation of how content could be perceived as stigmatizing has also been included. Importantly, the potential for information to be stigmatizing does not guarantee that all users would report feeling stigmatized after encountering the content. However, these tools should be developed in a way that does not risk the miscommunication of negative stereotypes related to body size. Additionally, we highlight that evidence‐based strategies and the absence of stigmatizing content are not mutually exclusive, underscoring the important contributions of both areas of research in the study of commercially available apps for weight‐related behaviors.
2. POTENTIAL FUTURE DIRECTIONS
2.1. Clearly define the problem
An important step is systematic evaluation of the form, prevalence, and scope of weight stigmatizing content within commercially available, health‐focused mobile apps. Behavioral researchers undertaking systematic reviews of apps to determine prevalence of evidence‐based strategies might expand their criteria to include presence and form of weight stigma. Collaboration between mobile health researchers and weight stigma researchers will be particularly advantageous, where the end result will serve to advance both groups' concerns.
2.2. Evaluate user perception of weight stigma
In addition to documenting the presence of weight stigma within commercially available apps, it will be important to conduct research to better understand how users experience this content, whether it is perceived as stigmatizing, how it impacts motivation to change behavior and app engagement, and ultimately how it impacts behavior change. This may be complicated by the fact that potential app users may actually endorse and request weight stigmatizing features of an app as many individuals internalize negative weight‐related attitudes. 12
2.3. Harm reduction at the individual level
It is not necessary to wait until the scope of weight stigma in commercial apps is defined and well‐understood to imagine some proactive steps forward. At an individual level, researchers and clinicians may prioritize taking a more involved approach when recommending apps within research studies and clinical practice (e.g., using apps and reviewing content prior to recommending use). To do this effectively, sensitivity to the issue of weight stigma is required and current knowledge of research related to weight stigma. It is important to become educated on these issues6, 7 or build collaborative relationships with those who have the necessary expertise.
2.4. Develop a framework/tool for researchers and providers
For the majority of researchers and practitioners who are not experts in weight stigma, systematically reviewing commercially available apps for stigmatizing content may be an unworkable agenda. Alternatively, there may be benefit to developing a framework or set of guidelines that researchers and providers can use to review a small set of apps they are considering for use prior to prescribing.
2.5. Building a better app
There is growing acknowledgment that researcher‐developed apps rarely achieve the same reach as commercially available apps. Therefore, industry‐research collaborations are more important than ever. Partnerships between industry and behavioral researchers provides the ideal opportunity to develop evidence‐based tools that can be disseminated widely. These partnerships may benefit from content experts in weight stigma specifically, to ensure that evidence‐based behavioral strategies are adapted for smartphone delivery without the potential for users' to feel stigmatized. Working with individuals of varying body sizes during the user‐input phase of development will also be crucial.
This review was informed by decades of research documenting weight stigma across various settings. The lessons learned and potential solutions identified in the existing literature can be used to guide change within apps as well. For example, the UConn Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity (http://www.uconnruddcenter.org/) provides information and resources for combatting weight stigma. An example includes resources for health care providers to discuss obesity with patients in a way that does not reinforce obesity stereotypes or equate smaller body size with characterological improvement (examples 1, 2, and 4 illustrated in Table 1). These same resources can provide guidance for tackling miscommunications about BMI and body size within apps (examples 6 and 8 illustrated in Table 1). For example, apps could provide brief education about the limits of BMI as a health marker.
Further, existing literature highlights that individuals often vary in the terms they prefer to use when discussing their body size (i.e., obesity, larger body, higher weight, and fat).13, 14, 15 This provides an opportunity to include features that allow users to select the language they will encounter during app use, resulting in a more personalized experience. Resources from the Rudd Center also include a media gallery where images of individuals with larger bodies can be accessed and used to increase representation of various body sizes within commercially available apps (examples 5 and 7 illustrated in Table 1).
3. CONCLUSION
The proliferation of commercially available health‐focused apps used for weight loss and changing weight‐related behavior presents a great opportunity for both obesity researchers and clinicians to better serve their patients. However, the perpetuation of weight stigma within commercially available apps has the potential to unintentionally interfere with behavior change and harm the well‐being of users. It is incumbent on obesity researchers and practitioners to address this issue on both a macro and micro level to ensure the availability of apps that are guided by an evidence‐base of both weight management and weight stigma research. 16 Developing thoughtful partnerships for app development is critical in this process. Apps have potential to expand the reach and impact of evidence‐based approaches to weight control. To fully realize the potential of these tools, it will be critical to acknowledge and eliminate the potential harm in the form weight stigmatization.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
KayLoni L. Olson generated the initial idea for this perspective piece and prepared the manuscript. All co‐authors contributed to formalizing the content and revising the manuscript.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
KayLoni L. Olson and Emily Panza are funded on an NIH training grant (T32 HL076134). Stephanie P. Goldstein time for this project was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (F32HL143954; PI: Goldstein).
References
REFERENCES
- 1. Pagoto S, Schneider K, Jojic M, DeBiasse M, Mann D. Evidence‐based strategies in weight‐loss mobile Apps. Am J Prev Med. 2013;45(5):576‐582. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Chen J, Cade JE, Allman‐Farinelli M. The most popular mobile Apps for weight loss: a quality assessment. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2015;3(4):e104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Research2Guidance . mHealth App Economics: Current status and future trends in mobile health. 2017. Nov. https://research2guidance.com/product/mhealth-economics-2017-current-status-and-future-trends-in-mobile-health/
- 4. Zhao J, Freeman B, Li M. Can mobile phone Apps influence people's health behavior change? An evidence review. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(11):e287. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Poushter J. Mobile ownership and internet usage continues to climb in emerging economies. Pew Res Center. 2016;22:1‐44. [Google Scholar]
- 6. Puhl RM, Himmelstein MS, Pearl RL. Weight stigma as a psychosocial contributor to obesity. Am Psychol. 2020;75(2):274. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Tomiyama AJ. Stress and obesity. Annu Rev Psychol. 2019;70:703‐718. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Rivera J, McPherson A, Hamilton J, et al. Mobile apps for weight management: a scoping review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2016;4(3):e87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Panza GA, Armstrong LE, Taylor BA, Puhl RM, Livingston J, Pescatello LS. Weight bias among exercise and nutrition professionals: a systematic review. Obes Rev. 2018;19(11):1492‐1503. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Lozano‐Sufrategui L, Carless D, Pringle A, Sparkes A, McKenna J. “Sorry mate, you're probably a bit too fat to be able to do any of these”: men's experiences of weight stigma. Int J Men's Health. 2016;15(1):4‐23. [Google Scholar]
- 11. Schvey NA, Sbrocco T, Bakalar JL, et al. The experience of weight stigma among gym members with overweight and obesity. Stigma Health. 2017;2(4):292. [Google Scholar]
- 12. Puhl RM, Himmelstein MS, Quinn DM. Internalizing weight stigma: prevalence and sociodemographic considerations in US adults. Obesity. 2018;26(1):167‐175. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Puhl R, Peterson JL, Luedicke J. Motivating or stigmatizing? Public perceptions of weight‐related language used by health providers. Int J Obes. 2013;37(4):612‐619. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Tanas R, Bernasconi S, Marsella M, Corsello G. What's the name? Weight stigma and the battle against obesity. Italian J Pediatrics. 2020;46:1‐3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Puhl RM. What words should we use to talk about weight? A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies examining preferences for weight‐related terminology. Obes Rev. 2020;21(6):e13008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Wykes T, Schueller S. Why reviewing apps is not enough: transparency for trust (T4T) principles of responsible health app marketplaces. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(5):e12390. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Myre M, Glenn NM, Berry TR. Exploring the impact of physical activity‐related weight stigma among women with self‐identified obesity. Qual Res Sport Exerc Health. 2020:1‐18. 10.1080/2159676X.2020.1751690 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Greenleaf C, Klos L, Hauff C, Hennum A, Pozoliniski B, Serafin G. “Unless you puke, faint, or die, keep going!” Exploring weight stigma in the gym on the Biggest Loser. Fat Studies. 2019;8(2):110‐126. [Google Scholar]
- 19. Schwartz MB, Chambliss HON, Brownell KD, Blair SN, Billington C. Weight bias among health professionals specializing in obesity. Obes Res. 2003;11(9):1033‐1039. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Ogden J, Clementi C. The experience of being obese and the many consequences of stigma. J Obes. 2010;2010:429098. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Vartanian LR. Disgust and perceived control in attitudes toward obese people. Int J Obes. 2010;34(8):1302‐1307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Sogg S, Grupski A, Dixon JB. Bad words: why language counts in our work with bariatric patients. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2018;14(5):682‐692. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Palascha A, van Kleef E, van Trijp HC. How does thinking in Black and White terms relate to eating behavior and weight regain? J Health Psychol. 2015;20(5):638‐648. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Ringel MM, Ditto PH. The moralization of obesity. Social Sci Med. 2019;237:112399. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Wu YK, Berry DC. Impact of weight stigma on physiological and psychological health outcomes for overweight and obese adults: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2018;74(5):1030‐1042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Lieberman DL, Tybur JM, Latner JD. Disgust sensitivity, obesity stigma, and gender: contamination psychology predicts weight bias for women, not men. Obesity. 2012;20(9):1803‐1814. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Nutter S, Russell‐Mayhew S, Saunders JF. Towards a sociocultural model of weight stigma. Eat Weight Disord; 2020. 10.1007/s40519-020-00931-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Kwan S. Competing motivational discourses for weight loss: means to ends and the nexus of beauty and health. Qual Health Res. 2009;19(9):1223‐1233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Heuer CA, McClure KJ, Puhl RM. Obesity stigma in online news: a visual content analysis. J Health Commun. 2011;16(9):976‐987. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Wellman JD, Araiza AM, Newell EE, McCoy SK. Weight stigma facilitates unhealthy eating and weight gain via fear of fat. Stigma Health. 2018;3(3):186. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Flint SW, Reale S. Weight stigma in frequent exercisers: overt, demeaning and condescending. J Health Psychol. 2018;23(5):710‐719. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
