Examination of Gender Differences: Causal Attributions of Treatment-Seeking Individuals With Overweight and Obesity.

Q2 Psychology
Clinical Psychology in Europe Pub Date : 2024-12-20 eCollection Date: 2024-12-01 DOI:10.32872/cpe.12089
Carmen Henning, Caroline Seiferth, Tanja Färber, Magdalena Pape, Stephan Herpertz, Sabine Steins-Loeber, Jörg Wolstein
{"title":"Examination of Gender Differences: Causal Attributions of Treatment-Seeking Individuals With Overweight and Obesity.","authors":"Carmen Henning, Caroline Seiferth, Tanja Färber, Magdalena Pape, Stephan Herpertz, Sabine Steins-Loeber, Jörg Wolstein","doi":"10.32872/cpe.12089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Addressing patients' perceptions of the causes of their overweight and obesity may be a promising approach to enhance treatment motivation and success. Previous research suggests that there are gender differences in these aspects. The objective of this study was to investigate gender differences in causal attributions among individuals with overweight and obesity who participated in a cognitive-behavioral mobile health (mHealth) intervention.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Causal attributions were assessed using the revised Illness Perceptions Questionnaire, which included a rated and open answering section. An ANCOVA was conducted for each causal factor (behavioral, psychological, risk, external) as a dependent variable to determine gender differences, which were analysed with chi-squared tests for open-ended responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most frequently mentioned and highly rated cause was behavior for both genders (59.8% of 639 responses). The results indicated that women rated psychological causes, particularly stress-related causes, significantly higher, <i>F</i>(1,211) = 14.88, <i>p</i> < .001, η<sup>2</sup> = .07, and were more likely to cite emotional eating than men, χ<sup>2</sup>(1, <i>N</i> = 639) = 15.06, <i>p</i> < .001. Men rated alcohol stronger as cause than women, <i>t</i>(125.05) = 3.79, <i>p</i> < .001.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings of this study contribute to the understanding of the gender differences in causal attributions among individuals with overweight or obesity. Implementing stress management interventions with a focus on emotion regulation is pivotal, especially for females. Interventions should focus on sensitizing males to the association between emotions and eating behavior. The causal attributions should be assessed with different survey methods in order to match the patient's view of their condition.</p>","PeriodicalId":34029,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology in Europe","volume":"6 4","pages":"e12089"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11960563/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology in Europe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.12089","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Addressing patients' perceptions of the causes of their overweight and obesity may be a promising approach to enhance treatment motivation and success. Previous research suggests that there are gender differences in these aspects. The objective of this study was to investigate gender differences in causal attributions among individuals with overweight and obesity who participated in a cognitive-behavioral mobile health (mHealth) intervention.

Method: Causal attributions were assessed using the revised Illness Perceptions Questionnaire, which included a rated and open answering section. An ANCOVA was conducted for each causal factor (behavioral, psychological, risk, external) as a dependent variable to determine gender differences, which were analysed with chi-squared tests for open-ended responses.

Results: The most frequently mentioned and highly rated cause was behavior for both genders (59.8% of 639 responses). The results indicated that women rated psychological causes, particularly stress-related causes, significantly higher, F(1,211) = 14.88, p < .001, η2 = .07, and were more likely to cite emotional eating than men, χ2(1, N = 639) = 15.06, p < .001. Men rated alcohol stronger as cause than women, t(125.05) = 3.79, p < .001.

Conclusion: The findings of this study contribute to the understanding of the gender differences in causal attributions among individuals with overweight or obesity. Implementing stress management interventions with a focus on emotion regulation is pivotal, especially for females. Interventions should focus on sensitizing males to the association between emotions and eating behavior. The causal attributions should be assessed with different survey methods in order to match the patient's view of their condition.

性别差异的检验:超重和肥胖寻求治疗个体的因果归因。
背景:解决患者对超重和肥胖原因的看法可能是提高治疗积极性和成功率的一种有前途的方法。以往的研究表明,在这些方面存在性别差异。本研究旨在调查参与认知行为移动医疗(mHealth)干预的超重和肥胖患者在因果归因方面的性别差异:方法:使用修订后的疾病认知问卷对因果关系进行评估,该问卷包括评分和开放式回答两个部分。将每个因果因素(行为、心理、风险、外部)作为因变量进行方差分析,以确定性别差异,并对开放式回答进行卡方检验:男女两性最常提及且评价最高的原因都是行为(占 639 个回答的 59.8%)。结果显示,女性对心理原因,尤其是压力相关原因的评价明显高于男性,F(1,211) = 14.88,p < .001,η2 = .07,而且女性比男性更容易提到情绪化饮食,χ2(1, N = 639) = 15.06,p < .001。与女性相比,男性更倾向于认为酒精是导致情绪化饮食的原因,t(125.05)= 3.79,p < .001:本研究的结果有助于了解超重或肥胖症患者在因果关系归因方面的性别差异。实施以情绪调节为重点的压力管理干预至关重要,尤其是对女性而言。干预措施应侧重于让男性认识到情绪与饮食行为之间的关联。应采用不同的调查方法对因果关系进行评估,以符合患者对自身状况的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Psychology in Europe
Clinical Psychology in Europe Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信