Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017;10(3):223-237.
doi: 10.1159/000475716. Epub 2017 Jun 10.

Weight Bias: A Systematic Review of Characteristics and Psychometric Properties of Self-Report Questionnaires

Affiliations
Review

Weight Bias: A Systematic Review of Characteristics and Psychometric Properties of Self-Report Questionnaires

Emilie Lacroix et al. Obes Facts. 2017.

Abstract

Background: People living with overweight and obesity often experience weight-based stigmatization. Investigations of the prevalence and correlates of weight bias and evaluation of weight bias reduction interventions depend upon psychometrically-sound measurement. Our paper is the first to comprehensively evaluate the psychometric properties, use of people-first language within items, and suitability for use with various populations of available self-report measures of weight bias.

Methods: We searched five electronic databases to identify English-language self-report questionnaires of weight bias. We rated each questionnaire's psychometric properties based on initial validation reports and subsequent use, and examined item language.

Results: Our systematic review identified 40 original self-report questionnaires. Most questionnaires were brief, demonstrated adequate internal consistency, and tapped key cognitive and affective dimensions of weight bias such as stereotypes and blaming. Current psychometric evidence is incomplete for many questionnaires, particularly with regard to the properties of test-retest reliability, sensitivity to change as well as discriminant and structural validity. Most questionnaires were developed prior to debate surrounding terminology preferences, and do not employ people-first language in the items administered to participants.

Conclusions: We provide information and recommendations for clinicians and researchers in selecting psychometrically sound measures of weight bias for various purposes and populations, and discuss future directions to improve measurement of this construct.

Keywords: Assessment; Obesity; Stigma; Systematic review; Weight bias.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow diagram.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Puhl RM, Heuer CA. The stigma of obesity: a review and update. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2009;17:941–964. - PubMed
    1. Ruggs EN, King EB, Hebl M, Fitzsimmons M. Assessment of weight stigma. Obes Facts. 2010;3:60–69. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cook JE, Purdie-Vaughns V, Meyer IH, Busch JTA. Intervening within and across levels: a multilevel approach to stigma and public health. Soc Sci Med. 2014;103:101–109. - PubMed
    1. Phelan SM, Burgess D, Yeazel M, Hellerstedt W, Griffin J, Ryn M. Impact of weight bias and stigma on quality of care and outcomes for patients with obesity. Obes Rev. 2015;16:319–326. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jones CP. Levels of racism: a theoretic framework and a gardener's tale. Am J Public Health. 2000;90:1212–1215. - PMC - PubMed

Grants and funding