Cognitive dissonance for weight stigma reduction: The development and effect of a counter-attitudinal advocacy intervention.

Abstract

Weight stigmatization is persistent and pervasive, leading to numerous negative consequences. This study developed a weight stigma reduction intervention rooted in Cognitive Dissonance Theory aimed at reducing stigma towards individuals living in larger bodies. Undergraduate students (N = 325) were randomized to one of three conditions: Cognitive Dissonance (i.e., Written Advocacy or Written + Vocalized Advocacy) or Control. Participants in both Cognitive Dissonance conditions provided a written statement advocating for a proposal benefiting individuals living in larger bodies that would be somewhat costly to participants. Those in the Written + Vocalized Advocacy condition also vocalized their arguments to further enhance dissonance. It was hypothesized that compared to Controls, participants in both Cognitive Dissonance conditions would report reduced weight stigma and greater commitment to a prosocial action, with the strongest effects for the Written + Vocalized Advocacy condition. There was a significant reduction in weight stigma across all conditions, but minimal support for significant differences between conditions. Participants in the Cognitive Dissonance conditions did not commit significantly more hours towards the prosocial action compared to Controls. There was limited support that cognitive dissonance was induced. Future studies should pre-screen participants endorsing stronger weight stigma to help ensure they are advocating for a counter-attitudinal cause.