BackgroundAlthough the stigma of eating disorders such as anorexia has been well established, little is known about the social consequences of “clean dieting” and orthorexia nervosa. In two studies, we examined the social stigma of clean dieting and orthorexia.MethodIn Study 1, participants read a vignette describing a woman following a “clean” diet, a woman with anorexia, or a control target (minimal information about the individual). In Study 2, participants read a vignette describing a woman with orthorexia, a woman displaying identical orthorexic behaviors but without the orthorexia label, a woman with anorexia, or a control target. Participants then rated the target individual on a range of measures assessing stereotypes, emotions, and behavioral intentions toward the target.ResultsStudy 1 found that the clean-dieting target was evaluated more negatively than the control target on some dimensions, but less negatively than the target with anorexia nervosa. Study 2 found that evaluations of the targets with orthorexia nervosa were more negative than evaluations of a control target, but did not differ from evaluations of the target with anorexia nervosa. Perceptions of the target’s control over her behavior were associated with more positive evaluations (Studies 1 and 2), whereas perceptions of blame and responsibility for the condition were associated with more negative evaluations (Study 2).ConclusionsOverall, these findings highlight the potential negative social consequences of clean dieting and orthorexia nervosa, and point to perceptions of control and blame as potential mechanisms underlying the stigma of these conditions.

No abstract

No abstract

Aim To investigate the psychosocial impact of genetic testing for childhood‐onset developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs) in order to identify parents’ information and support needs. Method In this mixed‐methods study, we conducted in‐depth semi‐structured interviews with parents (n=25) of children, recruited from the Sydney Children’s Hospital Network, Australia, who had received genetic testing. Thematic saturation was reached; interviews were transcribed, deidentified, line‐by‐line coded, and thematically analysed by three coders, using an inductive approach. We also quantitatively assessed the impact of genetic testing on quality of life outcomes and parents’ satisfaction with genetics services. Results Qualitative and quantitative analysis revealed that compassionate genetic counselling and consistent clinician–parent partnerships facilitated parents’ capacity to process their child’s genetic diagnosis. Parents believed that a sparsity of diagnosis‐specific information to contextualize their child’s genetic DEE, combined with limited psychosocial resources to support coping with ongoing prognostic uncertainty, contributed to chronic psychological stress. Access to diagnosis‐specific resources and peer support was considered necessary to support parents in communicating their child’s genetic DEE and to reduce social isolation. Interpretation Integrated psychosocial resources, including tailored psychological supports, diagnosis‐specific information, and peer‐to‐peer supports, are priority areas to complement genetic services.