Prejudgments of those who eat a “healthy” versus an “unhealthy” food for breakfast

Oakes, Michael E.; Slotterback, Carole S.

doi:10.1007/s12144-004-1001-6

Cited by 59 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The somewhat negative evaluation of females (compared to males) appears to be in agreement with previous work involving dietary choices (Vartanian et al 2007;Oakes andSlotterback 2004-2005). In the present study, female placebo responders were considered more gullible and emotional but less intelligent than male placebo Respondents rated each characteristic in the order shown in the table *p<.05 treatment condition differences on univariate follow-up tests; **p<.05 treatment condition differences only for females; ***p<.05 sex differences for the placebo condition responders.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Some of the descriptors were positive (for example, intelligent) while others were more negative (for example, lazy). Many of the descriptors have been used in previous research (Oakes andSlotterback 2004-2005).…”

Section: Materials/proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, it was considered likely that femaleplacebo responders would be evaluated more negatively than males who benefit from a placebo on several of the descriptors. For example, it has been shown previously than women (compared to men) who eat "bad" foods (for example, pie) or larger meals are considered less attractive, likeable, and healthy (Vartanian et al 2007;Oakes andSlotterback 2004-2005). It was considered unlikely that placebo responders would differ from those benefiting from medication on many of the descriptors (for example, hostile, attractive, friendly, rude, clean, orderly, boring, conceited, caring, humorous, immoral, concerned about appearance, sloppy, overweight, and underweight).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Students’ Beliefs About Placebo Responders: Implications for Fundamentals of Psychology Courses

Oakes

2009

Curr Psychol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific sources often warn readers to avoid negative assumptions about those who respond to a placebo, however, no one has addressed the beliefs that lay people hold concerning those who benefit from a placebo. In the current study Fundamentals of Psychology students, who have encountered information about the placebo response in their coursework, evaluated target men and women who had benefited from exposure to a placebo versus a medication on a variety of descriptors (forty-seven in all) that assessed morality, cognitive ability, personality traits, and physical characteristics. The students judged placebo responders (compared to those who benefited from medication) very negatively, for example, placebo responders were considered gullible, overindulgent, lazy, dishonest, deceptive, impulsive, and undisciplined. Female-placebo responders (compared to males) were judged as less intelligent but more emotional. These beliefs contrast with much of the information provided in the scientific literature about the placebo response and suggests that information encountered in coursework may not be addressing or even contributing to an inappropriate negative stigma about placebo responders.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Materials/proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Students’ Beliefs About Placebo Responders: Implications for Fundamentals of Psychology Courses

Oakes

2009

Curr Psychol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, it is common to judge the morality of others based on what and how much they eat (Vartanian, Herman, & Polivy, 2007). For instance, people who eat non-fattening foods are considered more moral than people who eat fattening foods (Stein & Nemeroff, 1995); oatmeal eaters are perceived as more moral than pie eaters (Oakes & Slotterback, 2004). Consistent with these theoretical links between morality and food choices, moral behavior is found to give one a license to eat less healthy products (Weibel, Messner, & Brügger, 2014).…”

Section: Morality and Food Choicesmentioning

confidence: 87%

Nazis by Kraut: A Playful Application of Moral Self-Licensing

Messner¹,

Brügger²

2015

PSYCH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Doing something moral gives one a license to do something immoral. This form of moral compensation is called "moral self-licensing". Interestingly, the moral behavior can take place in another domain than the subsequent immoral behavior. For example, buying eco-friendly products gives one a license to steal. This article is based on the idea that a healthy diet has a moral dimension. As a consequence, consuming a healthy product should give one a license for immoral behavior. This research supports this hypothesis on a playful study. This study shows that drinking sauerkraut juice contributes to a stronger support of Nazi-esque right wing ideology than drinking either nothing or a less-healthy beverage (Nestea).

show abstract

“…These messages can come from parents, friends, the media, or folklore (Oakes & Slotterback, 2005). Parents may instruct children not to eat sweets, and news media report on the link between intake of sugar and fat and chronic illnesses.…”

Section: Food Stereotypesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See the Seal? Understanding Restrained Eaters’ Responses to Nutritional Messages on Food Packaging

Lwin

Morrin

Tang

et al. 2013

Health Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food packaging in general and packaging incorporating health messages in particular have been active areas of inquiry, receiving attention from policymakers and food manufacturers alike. This study explores the effects of package seals and claims on perceived product healthfulness as a function of dietary restraint status. A laboratory experiment using realistic three-dimensional packaging shows that for restrained eaters (i.e., those who try to restrict their food intake), nutrition claims on "healthy" products and nutrition seals on "unhealthy" products are effective at enhancing perceptions of product healthfulness. Unrestrained eaters, in contrast, are largely unaffected by nutrition seals and claims. These results provide insights into restrained eaters' purchase motivations, as well as guidance for policymakers seeking to regulate the use of seals and claims.

show abstract

Prejudgments of those who eat a “healthy” versus an “unhealthy” food for breakfast

Cited by 59 publications

References 15 publications

Students’ Beliefs About Placebo Responders: Implications for Fundamentals of Psychology Courses

Students’ Beliefs About Placebo Responders: Implications for Fundamentals of Psychology Courses

Nazis by Kraut: A Playful Application of Moral Self-Licensing

See the Seal? Understanding Restrained Eaters’ Responses to Nutritional Messages on Food Packaging

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About