Elsevier

Body Image

Volume 29, June 2019, Pages 149-155
Body Image

The impact of different responses to fat talk on body image and socioemotional outcomes

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2019.03.009Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Ignoring fat talk led to the worst body satisfaction, support, and shame outcomes.

  • Challenging fat talk showed positive effects for shame and perceived support.

  • Fat talk guidelines and psychoeducation should preclude ignoring fat talk.

Abstract

Fat talk, the act of making disparaging comments about one’s own appearance, has been associated with an extensive range of negative body image outcomes. Despite this well-established body of literature highlighting the prevalence and consequences, scant research exists on the impact of different responses to fat talk in situ. The current online experiment aimed to explore four different responses to fat talk and their impact on body satisfaction, shame, and feelings of support. Female participants (N = 191, Mage = 23.52, SDage = 4.54, rangeage = 18–40) recalled or imagined an experience of engaging in fat talk before being randomly assigned to receive a set response (where their fat talk was either challenged, ignored, reassured, or reciprocated). Largely in line with hypotheses, the Ignore condition led to the lowest level of body satisfaction and perceived support, and the highest level of shame. The Challenge condition resulted in positive outcomes for both perceived support and feelings of shame. The findings demonstrate that ignoring fat talk is associated with negative outcomes, providing evidence to inform practical guidelines aimed at tackling the social phenomenon.

Introduction

Fat talk, the act of making a negative comment about one’s own appearance, has demonstrated consistent negative associations with body image outcomes, such as body dissatisfaction, perceived pressure to be thin, thin-ideal internalisation, appearance-based comparisons, body checking, body surveillance, and body shame (Mills & Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, 2016). Engaging in fat talk is a highly frequent practice among young women, with 93% of a college-aged sample reporting doing so with their friends (Salk & Engeln-Maddox, 2011). As such, fat talk is an example of peer-based influence on the development and maintenance of body image disturbance, according to the tripartite influence model (Thompson, Heinberg, Altabe, & Tantleff-Dunn, 1999).

Whilst the majority of research in this area has focused on the negative relationship between fat talk and body image, very little attention has been given to how best to respond to the social phenomenon when in context. Nevertheless, current Australian guidelines recommend changing the subject when fat talk comments are made (The Butterfly Foundation, 2019), and some interventions recommend a similar approach, such as the recent self-compassion-based BodiMojo program, which instructs adolescent participants to simply “Drop the fat chat!” (Rodgers et al., 2018). Whilst these approaches effectively advocate ignoring fat talk, there is no published empirical evidence to support this position. Indeed, the two studies to date that have explored the effect of responses to fat talk have both focused on challenging the fat talk instead. Salk and Engeln-Maddox’s (2012) study examined challenging fat talk from the perspective of hearing fat talk among peers directly. Participants heard either two confederates engage in fat talk, neither confederate engage in fat talk, or one confederate engage in fat talk whilst the other challenged the fat talk (“Oh come on. You’re definitely not fat. I know we all say things like that but I don’t understand why. I just wish we focused on other things.”). Participants allocated to the challenge condition were less likely to engage in fat talk themselves, indicating that hearing someone’s fat talk being challenged offers some protection against the contagious nature of the social phenomenon.

A more recent study assessed the impact of imagining being a part of a reciprocal fat talk conversation versus a challenging fat talk conversation on women’s own fat talk frequency and affect (Ambwani, Baumgardner, Guo, Simms, & Abromowitz, 2017). The challenging fat talk vignette resulted in more positive outcomes, with participants who were randomly allocated to that condition reporting lower negative affect and fat talk engagement, as compared to those who viewed the vignette in which fat talk was reciprocated. These two studies are the only known studies to date that explore the effectiveness of a certain response to fat talk and, together, provide an initial suggestion as to which type of response might elicit positive effects in terms of decreasing future fat talk likelihood and negative affect.

Based on the above research and current published national guidelines, the present study aimed to evaluate the impact of a challenge and an ignore response to fat talk. Two additional responses were also examined based off previous literature; that of reassurance and reciprocation. Seeking reassurance from others that one’s appearance-related concerns are unwarranted is cited in the seminal fat talk literature as one of the reasons women engage in fat talk (Nichter & Vuckovic, 1994). If an individual receives that reassurance, this may alleviate some of their dissatisfaction with their body. Indeed, denying the person’s fat talk (i.e., providing reassurance that they do not need to be concerned about said body part/aspect of appearance) was identified as the most frequently provided response to fat talk among young women (Salk & Engeln-Maddox, 2011). Empathising and returning the fat talk (i.e., reciprocating and making a negative comment about one’s own appearance) has been identified as the expected response to fat talk in one study (Britton, Martz, Bazzini, Curtin & LeaShomb, 2006), and the second most commonly provided response in another (Salk & Engeln-Maddox, 2011). Nichter and Vuckovic (1994) highlight that fat talk can signify vulnerability with friends, encouraging social support and bonding through reciprocation, which can increase global self-esteem, and, possibly, body satisfaction specifically.

Given the nature of these four responses (Challenge, Reassure, Reciprocate, and Ignore), the current study aimed to consider the impact beyond body satisfaction to include the wider social and emotional consequences of fat talk responses. Previous research on receiving different responses in social interactions has focused on being ignored and consistently found that being ignored is associated with negative affective consequences, such as feeling ashamed, frustrated, and anxious (Geller, Goodstein, Silver, & Sternberg, 1974; Park, 2017). The social and emotional consequences of fat talk responses were operationalised in the current study as study-specific measures of state perceived support and shame. Participants completed a mock mood induction task aimed at assisting participants to recall or imagine, in detail, a personal instance of fat talk. Pre- and post-measures of body satisfaction, support, and shame were taken. It was hypothesised that the Challenge, Reassure, and Reciprocate responses would lead to higher post-body satisfaction, whilst the Ignore response would lead to lower post-body satisfaction, as compared to pre-manipulation measures. It was also hypothesised that the Ignore response would elicit the lowest level of support and the highest levels of shame, as compared to the other three responses.

Section snippets

Participants

A convenience sample of 191 young adult women ranging in age from 18 to 40, with a mean age of 23.52 (SD = 4.53), volunteered to participate. The body mass index (BMI) of the participants, ranged from 15.61 to 51.42, with an average of 24.65 (SD = 5.45). The majority of the sample identified their ethnicity as Australasian (74.87%), current level of study as undergraduate, i.e., bachelor’s degree (39.8%), relationship status as single (44%), living situation as living with parents/family

Characteristics of the sample

The four conditions were compared to assess any differences between them in key demographic, pre-, and trait measures (see Table 1). No significant differences between the groups was found for age, F(3, 187) = 0.47, p =  .70, ηp2 = .01, or BMI, F(3, 187) = 0.44, p =  .72, ηp2 = .01. There were also no significant differences between the four groups on pre-measures of body satisfaction, F(3, 187) = 1.50, p =  .22, ηp2 = .02, support, F(3, 187) = 0.64, p =  .59, ηp2 = .01, or shame, F(3,

Discussion

The aim of the current study was to ascertain the ideal response to give to fat talk comments (out of Challenge, Ignore, Reassure, and Reciprocate) in terms of the level of body satisfaction, support, and shame felt by the person who had participated in fat talk. The hypotheses were largely supported. The Reciprocate condition resulted in the highest level of body satisfaction, whilst the Ignore condition led to the lowest levels. Furthermore, the Ignore condition was associated with the lowest

Declarations of interest

None.

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References (25)

  • S.L. Franzoi et al.

    The Body Esteem Scale: Multidimensional structure and sex differences in a college population

    Journal of Personality Assessment

    (1984)
  • D.M. Geller et al.

    On being ignored: The effects of the violation of implicit rules of social interaction

    Sociometry

    (1974)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text