A Narrative Review and a Novel Stigma-Sensitive Approach to Study Weight Stigma Among Children

Abstract

Weight stigma is linked to negative health and well-being outcomes in both adults and children. Children with overweight or obesity often face stigma as bullying in various settings. When studying children’s perceptions of weight and obesity it is crucial to consider the ethicality, responsibility, and child-appropriateness of the methods used. At worst, the research method may reinforce weight-stigma-related thinking in children or yield inaccurate results. We conducted a narrative review, focusing on methods used to study children’s weight-stigma-related thinking and the consistency of the research findings. The findings of the review suggested that the choice of methodological approach may influence understanding of the phenomenon and the identification of children’s perspectives. Therefore, we conducted a stigma-sensitive approach to minimize reinforcing weight stigma by avoiding methods that condition children to think in weight-biased terms. Consequently, storytelling, drawing task, and individual interviews were employed. A total of 15 children (5 boys, 10 girls) aged 7 to 9 years participated in the study. The responses were analyzed using theory-driven content analysis to identify common categories. The results revealed that when exposed to a story with no explicit mention of characters’ physical appearances, the children focused more on the story’s events, as well as the personalities and emotions of the characters, rather than their physical traits. Based on these results, more research is needed on what kind of methods should be used to study children’s perceptions of weight stigma with sufficient reliability and ethical rigor.

Keywords

obesity stigma weight bias children qualitative research child research

Introduction

Weight stigma refers to the negative or discriminatory acts, attitudes, beliefs and ideologies targeted towards individuals because of their weight and size (Puhl & Latner, 2007). Weight stigma has been studied in children, and research has shown that, in addition to adults, children also hold negative attitudes and perceptions toward overweight and obesity (e.g. Pasquale & Celsi, 2017; Puhl & Latner, 2007). As early as the 1960s, children were found to have negative attitudes toward individuals with overweight or obesity (Richardson et al., 1961), and it has been identified in children as young as age two (Su & Di Santo, 2012). Weight stigma with children is typically manifested as teasing, physical bullying and relational victimization (Puhl & Latner, 2007).

High prevalence of experienced weight stigma is alarming (Puhl & Lessard, 2020), given its numerous adverse psychological, social and physical health consequences. These include depression, anxiety, substance use, low self-esteem, self-harm behaviors, social isolation, adverse academic outcomes, unhealthy eating behaviors, decreased physical activity and exacerbation of obesity (e.g. Pont et al., 2017). The weight-amplifying effect of obesity stigma is based on the so-called negative feedback loop between weight and stigma, in which the psychological harm caused by weight stigma leads to behaviors that promote weight gain (Haqq et al., 2021). In addition, in a systematic review and meta-analysis by Ma et al. (2021), findings supported positive concurrent and bidirectional relationships between weight stigma and weight status among children and adolescents.

Childhood obesity has risen globally, prompting increased attention towards understanding the stigma associated with it. Evidence suggests that weight-related stigma among children has increased between 1961 and 2001 (Latner & Stunkard, 2003). Various studies report that between 24% and 96% of children with overweight or obesity issues have experienced teasing related to their body size or weight (Puhl & Latner, 2007). Children are particularly vulnerable to the negative consequences of weight stigma and weight-based teasing as the formation of social relationships plays a critical role in their developmental processes (Puhl & Latner, 2007). In this article, a stigma-sensitive approach refers to the consideration of negative social stereotypes and misconceptions associated with higher body weight throughout the research design, implementation, and reporting. The understanding that weight is often linked to undesirable personal characteristics (Puhl & Latner, 2007) served as a conceptual framework for the study. These known attitudes were particularly considered when developing the story for children, ensuring that stigma related ideas were not unintentionally conveyed or imposed through the choices presented.

The aim of this study is two-phased. Firstly, with a narrative review we wanted to explore, what kind of methods are used when studying weight-stigma perceptions among 2–12-year-old children and their main findings. Secondly, we studied weight-stigma-related thinking in Finnish children by conducting a study with a stigma-sensitive approach that addresses the ethical challenges of previous approaches. The goal is to stimulate wider discussion on the appropriate and effective methods for investigating weight stigma in children.

Narrative Review

The literature search was conducted in the PsycInfo and Scopus databases first in June 2023 and repeated in June 2024 by the first author. The search terms and query were formulated using words related to childhood and weight stigma (Supplemental Material 1). Since the review focuses on the manifestation of weight stigma in children, particularly on attitudes toward overweight and obesity in children, the search query included words related to children and weight stigma, weight bias, anti-fat attitude, weight-related stereotypes and weight-related discrimination. For the same reason the search query excluded topics related to parents, family, and internalized weight stigma. The search results were limited to peer-reviewed academic publications published in the 2000s. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for publications included on the literature review can be found in Supplemental Material 1.

The suitability of publications identified through database searches was first assessed based on the title and abstract, followed by a full-text evaluation. The results from different databases varied somewhat, but there were also overlaps. A total of 148 records were retrieved from the two database searches, of which 81 were selected based on the title and abstract. After full-text assessment, 27 publications were included. Additionally, four publications were identified through manual search and included in the review. After removing duplicates, a total of 23 publications were included in the review (Supplemental Material 2). We aimed to provide a descriptive synthesis of the findings of the included publications without statistical aggregation by using narrative synthesis. A narrative review approach (Gregory & Denniss, 2018) was adopted, as the included publications comprised both qualitative and quantitative methodologies and the primary focus of the review was conceptual.

Findings From the Narrative Review

Weight stigma in children has been studied using various methods, yet the findings appear to be consistent regardless of the methods used. Most of the studies included in this review have observed weight-stigma-related thinking in children. Children tend to have negative attitudes toward peers with overweight or obesity issues and prefer less social interaction with them.

However, research on children’s weight stigma has predominantly relied on quantitative methodologies, often involving tasks where children are asked to rate figures or photographs of peers with varying body sizes and physical features (e.g. Harrison et al., 2016). In these studies, researchers commonly ask children to rank figures based on preference or to associate descriptive adjectives with them, under the assumption that such tasks elicit attitudes and unconscious biases related to weight (e.g. Harriger & Trammell, 2022). Additionally, some research has focused on children’s social behaviors, particularly in friendship selection and interactions with peers of different body sizes, and how such social dynamics relate to weight (e.g. Harriger & Trammell, 2022; Harrison et al., 2016).

In studies that have quantitatively examined children’s weight stigma through their attitudes, children have been found to hold negative attitudes toward images or drawings of individuals with overweight or obesity issues (Kihm, 2014; Latner & Stunkard, 2003). Furthermore, in all studies included in this review that utilized predefined adjectives or statements, children associate more negative attributes and fewer positive attributes with characters or images depicting individuals with overweight or obesity issues (Harriger & Trammell, 2022; Harrison et al., 2016; Parnell et al., 2021; Su & Di Santo, 2012).

In addition to examining children’s attitudes toward obesity, research has also explored how these attitudes impact their social relationships. In two studies, school-aged children were asked to name their most and least preferred classmates, and these nominations were compared to the children’s body mass index (BMI) (De La Haye et al., 2017; Kornilaki & Cheng, 2019). De La Haye et al. (2017) found that children with overweight were less likely to be nominated as friends and more likely to be considered undesirable compared to children without overweight.

Similarly, Kornilaki and Cheng (2019) observed a relationship between body size and popularity: a lower BMI was associated with higher popularity, whereas a higher BMI was linked to a lower social standing. The studies also revealed that children are more likely to choose a medium- or small-sized character or peer as a friend rather than a character or peer with overweight or obesity (Harriger & Trammell, 2022; Harrison et al., 2016). Additionally, children are more likely to engage in various social situations or activities with a medium- or small-sized character or peer than with one who has overweight or obesity (Parnell et al., 2021).

In studies investigating gender differences in children’s weight stigma, a variety of methods have been used to examine the phenomenon, making the results not always comparable. In several studies, children have evaluated characters that match their own gender. In some of these studies, weight stigma was equally strong in boys and girls (Parnell et al., 2021; Skinner et al., 2017), while in others, it was observed that girls exhibit stronger weight stigma than boys (Harriger & Trammell, 2022; Latner & Stunkard, 2003). However, in contrast to other studies, Fitzgerald et al. (2013) found that boys exhibited stronger weight stigma than girls. As all children in their study, including boys, evaluated only female characters, this may have influenced the result. Gender is an important social factor for children, so they tend to prefer members of their own gender. For example, in a study by Charsley et al. (2018), children were more reluctant to befriend an opposite-gender character than one with obesity.

The research evidence regarding the impact of age on the intensity of weight stigma is conflicting. In some studies, examining 3- to 6-year-olds, it has been found that weight stigma is stronger in older children (Harriger & Trammell, 2022; Harrison et al., 2016; Rodgers et al., 2019). On the other hand, a study involving 4- to 11-year-olds has shown that weight-stigma-related thinking is stronger in younger children (Carvalho et al., 2021). Interestingly, Kihm (2014) found that weight stigma is stronger among 3rd, 4th, and 6th graders (around 8–9 and 11 years old) than among kindergarten, 1st, 2nd, 5th, 7th, and 8th graders (around 5–7, 10, and 12–13 years old). There is also evidence suggesting that a child’s age does not influence the intensity of weight stigma, as no differences were found between children aged 4–8 and those aged 9–11 (Skinner et al., 2017).

A few studies investigating children’s weight-stigma-related thinking have focused on children’s perceptions of the causes of obesity. Rodgers et al. (2019) examined children’s views on the growth of body size and the factors behind it by combining qualitative and quantitative methods. In interviews, children primarily attributed the growth of a character’s body size to factors related to the amount and quality of food, with only a small number of children citing a lack of physical activity as a reason. A small portion of children suggested that growing older, pregnancy, or magic were causes of body size growth. A significant portion of children viewed body size growth and weight gain negatively, offering negative comments.

Other studies have found that when children perceive body size growth and weight gain as being dependent on an individual’s behavior, such as eating habits, weight stigma is more likely to emerge (Carvalho et al., 2021; Fitzgerald et al., 2013). In these studies, children were shown a medium-sized character and a character with overweight and were provided an explanation for the character’s body size growth and weight gain. When weight gain was explained by biological factors, children expressed more positive attitudes toward the larger character. However, when weight gain was explained by individual behavior, children’s attitudes toward character were more negative (Carvalho et al., 2021; Fitzgerald et al., 2013).

Charsley et al. (2018) did not observe overt weight stigma in their qualitative research. When children were interviewed about the differences between the presented characters, they focused more on gender or visible disabilities than on weight. The findings of Pugmire and Lyons (2018) also partially contradict other research evidence. Using qualitative methods, they explored how children talk about health and obesity. Children perceived obesity as the opposite of good health and physical fitness, associating it with poor diet and excessive eating, while thinness was linked to good health. They viewed healthiness and body size as matters of personal choice. However, children also found an overly simplistic approach to health and obesity problematic and occasionally highlighted perspectives related to enjoyment, practicality, moderation, happiness, and well-being.

Overall, the findings of the narrative review indicate that research on weight stigma among children predominantly relies on quantitative methodologies. However, the methods used should be critically examined, particularly concerning their ethicality and reliability. Several studies employed methodologies that required children to make forced choices between limited or binary options. Such approaches may inadvertently reinforce, or even instill, weight-stigma-related thinking by constraining children’s responses and framing body-related judgments in a reductive manner.

Stigma-Sensitive Approach

After the findings from the narrative review, we conducted a study with a stigma-sensitive approach, which aimed to consider the results highlighted by the narrative review, particularly regarding the ethics and reliability of the research methods. The present study employed a qualitative child research approach, using a drawing task and an individual interview with stimulus material that included a read-aloud story. The research interviews were conducted in January 2024. The study design was reviewed and approved by the Committee on Research Ethics of University of Eastern Finland (Statement 46/2023).

Participants

Fifteen children aged 7 to 9 years (mean=7.67 years, SD=0.60), including ten girls and five boys, from a primary school in the North Savonia region of Finland, participated in the study. Recruitment was conducted via an email sent by the school principal to the parents of all children in grades one and two (aged 7 to 9 years). Parents were informed of the true purpose of the study but were instructed not to disclose it to their children. The research interviews were conducted in Finnish, requiring participants to have proficiency in the language. No additional participation criteria were applied. To maintain participant anonymity, only the children’s age and gender were recorded, with no further demographic data collected. All participating children had provided an oral assent, and their parents had provided a written informed consent.

Materials

As part of the study protocol, the researchers created a short fictional story (Supplemental Material 3) and an interview guide (Table 1). The story featured two characters, Pami and Tini, who go on a fishing trip. The names were selected as imaginary gender-neutral Finnish names. Three common stereotypes, identified in previous studies demonstrating that children hold negative perceptions of individuals with obesity, were applied to one of the characters, Tini: lazy, unhappy, and low self-confidence (Hansson et al., 2009; Tiggemann & Anesbury, 2000; Tiggemann & Wilson-Barrett, 1998). To emphasize the contrast between the characters, the other character, Pami, was portrayed with attributes opposite to those assigned to Tini: diligent, joyful and high self-confidence. These contrasting traits were conveyed through the characters’ actions. The gender and physical appearance of the characters were deliberately left unspecified to emphasize stigma-sensitivity of the study. The first author developed the story and created notes, from which a narrative text was produced with the help of AI (ChatGPT). Then the researchers revised and finalized the story. The interview guide was structured to include primarily open-ended questions, ensuring that children were not conditioned to consider weight stigma. The research questions guided the topics addressed during the interviews. The researcher piloted the study protocol with an 8-year-old child before the actual interviews.

Table 1.

Interview Guide

The questions are repeated for both characters (Tini and Pami) in the story.

Other issues that arise may also be discussed with the interviewee.

1. Tell me what you have drawn.

2. What does Tini/Pami look like?

3. Why does Tini/Pami look like this?

• If necessary, specify different body parts, e.g. head, hair, face, arms, torso, legs, other features.

4. How do the characters differ from each other?

5. What kind of personality does Tini/Pami have?

6. How do the characters’ personalities differ?

7. What is the general nature of the children who resemble Tini/Pami (referring to the drawings)?

8. Is there anything else you would like to tell us about Tini/Pami?

9. Any questions you want to ask?

Finally, summarize what was discussed.

Tell the child that if they have any questions afterwards, mum or dad will have my contact details.

Data Collection

Data collection was designed to be age-appropriate and conducted within the children’s school environment during regular school hours. Since the children were unfamiliar with the researcher (the first author, female, with background in dietetics) who conducted all the interviews, neutral topics such as hobbies were discussed prior to the interview to create a more comfortable and relaxed atmosphere. Additionally, before the interview, the children were informed about the procedure and asked if they wish to participate in the study. They were also informed that they could withdraw from the interview at any time. After this, the children expressed their agreement to participate in the study.

The duration of the individual interviews (including the time spent on storytelling and the drawing task) varied between 17 and 65 minutes (mean 31 minutes). All the interviews were recorded using two independent audio devices. The researcher first read the story aloud to the child. Following the reading, the child was provided with colored pencils, markers, and blank paper and instructed to draw the story characters based on their own imagination. No time limit was imposed on the drawing task. Once the child indicated they had completed the drawing task, the researcher conducted an interview, asking questions related to the characters’ appearance according to the interview guide (Table 1). Upon concluding the interview, each child received colorful markers and erasers as a surprise gift. Interviews were recorded and field notes were made after the interviews.

Data Analysis

The audio recordings were transcribed verbatim, and the children’s responses were subjected to a qualitative theory-driven content analysis, as outlined by Bengtsson (2016). This process was facilitated using data analysis software Atlas.ti (version 24.1.1.30813). The analysis concentrated on both the expressive and literal content of the transcripts. To assess the generalizability of the findings, we examined the distribution of the identified categories across individual measurement units, with each child constituting a single measurement unit (range 0–15). The children’s drawings were not analyzed as the drawing task was designed to serve as a stimulus for the interviews.

This analytic approach was selected due to its suitability for identifying and emphasizing the key issues that emerged from the children’s discussions and perspectives. To the best of our knowledge, this specific topic has not previously been explored among Finnish children, and the methodological approach employed in this study has only been utilized once in prior research (Leddy, 2011). Consequently, we employed an open-ended, exploratory approach to the data to ensure that the categories accurately reflected the children’s responses.

The initial coding and categorization process was conducted by the first author, followed by modifications made by the corresponding author. The final coding framework and set of categories were subsequently reviewed and approved by all authors. The Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research (COREQ) checklist (Supplemental Material 4) were used to ensure study rigor.

Results

Categories Identified

Based on the children’s interviews, the analysis revealed that children predominantly focused on the events of the story, as well as the personalities and emotions of the characters, rather than their physical appearances. When the children were specifically asked about the characters’ appearances, their descriptions primarily revolved around clothing and color. The categories that were formulated based on children’s stories were personality, emotions, appearance, gender, events and activity, and body shape and size. Table 2 provides a more detailed overview of the identified categories, accompanied by illustrative quotes from the children’s interviews.

Table 2.

Categories Related to How Children Interpreted the Story Characters and Number of Children Mentioning the Attributes (n=15, Range 0−15)

Categories (n)	Sample quote excerpts (C=child)	Observations
Personality
Lazy (6)	C6: She wanted to stay in bed; C11: Tini is a little bit lazy; C12: Tini wants to just sit down and eat candy	Based on a story, children described Pami with verbs related to activity and Tini related to laziness.
Brisk (7)	C5: Tini likes to do everything; C7: She is excited in many things, and she wants to be crazy and fun; C10: Pami is brisk
Funny (2)	C7: Pami’s face looks excited and fun; C10: Pami looks like fun
Kind (4)	C4: Tini behaves well; C6: Pami is, like, a kind child
Trusting (1)	C7: Tini is kind, brave and trusting
Active (5)	C1: This one takes the fishing rod first; C12: Pami looks like they want to play football and all different games; C7: She moves a lot, so she doesn’t want to wear shoes
Emotions
Happy (10)	C2: She looks at the fish, and she has a smiling mouth; C3: Her face looks happy; C6: Pami looks like that because he is happy to go fishing	Children described the characters’ emotional states, Pami frequently associated with feelings of happiness and excitement, whereas Tini was mostly described as tired.
Excited (4)	C2: I think they would be like ‘hooray we got three fish!’; C4: Tini looks excited; C8: Pami is really excited to go fishing
Tired (4)	C1: They probably wanted to sleep more; C6: Tini looks a little bit tired
Perky (2)	C7: Tini looks perky and happy at the same time; C12: Pami’s face seems perky and happy
Not in the mood (5)	C4: Pami doesn’t want to take the fishing rod; C8: Tini is like ‘I don’t want to go fishing’
Appearance
Clothes and hair (12)	C2: Tini has a turquoise dress and hair and there’s a red heart on the dress; C3: Pami has a long shirt and pants and shoes; C7: The hair is like… They have a ponytail	When discussing the characters’ physical appearances, children primarily focused on their clothing, hair, and the colors associated with them.
Looks ordinary (7)	C1: Tini’s face looks quite ordinary; C4: Pami’s body looks ordinary; C6: His hands and feet look normal	Most other children only provided descriptions of the characters’ appearances after being explicitly prompted by the researcher.
Looks good (2)	C2: Pami looks good; C14: Tini’s face looks good
Gender (5)	C3: She’s a girl, so I figured pink gloves suit her; C3: He has long hair even though he is a boy; C6: The other one looks like a boy and the other one looks like a girl	Only five out of the fifteen children explicitly stated that the characters were male or female, while the remaining children did not mention gender
Events and activity (11)	C3: Over here the seagull says ‘berries’; C9: I drew two cats, who are sitting at the fishing spot; C13: Here they are coming home from the fishing trip, and they have fish	The children showed a marked interest in the events of the story, with half of them depicting the characters engaged in activities described in the narrative (e.g., fishing). When the researcher inquired about their drawings, most children discussed the events they had illustrated.
Body shape and size
Height (6)	C1: His arms look quite short, but his legs are a bit longer; C5: Tini’s legs look long and durable; C10: Pami is a little bit smaller, a bit shorter	The children paid significantly less attention to the characters’ body size compared to other aspects such as personality, emotions, clothing, hair, colors, or activities

Children’s Perceptions of the Story Character’s Bodies and Weight Bias

None of the children spontaneously mentioned body size when asked to describe their drawings. However, when explicitly questioned about the characters’ appearance, eight out of fifteen children commented on the body size, focusing primarily on the characters’ height. Although some children described one character as “big” or “small”, upon further inquiry, they clarified that they were referring to height rather than overall body size:

Child 11: “Tini is a little bit bigger than Pami.”

Researcher: “In what way?”

Child 11: “Well, Tini is a bit taller.”

Some children differentiated the characters based on height (Figure 1

Figure 1.

Drawing made by child 11 (age 8). The character Tini on the right is portrayed taller, and Pami on the left is portrayed shorter

), but no consistent pattern of associating height with a specific character emerged across the interviews.

Importantly, no explicit weight bias was observed in the children’s responses. None of the children associated larger body sizes or obesity with either character, and the topic of obesity did not arise in either the drawings or the interviews (Figure 2). Four children mentioned “chubbiness”, illness, candy consumption (character Tini), and an athletic appearance (character Pami) when discussing the characters’ physical traits. Child 5 described that “Pami’s body looks, like, ordinary. They look like they don’t have any illness or such.” and Child 14 that “Pami’s body doesn’t look chubby, it’s just right.”

Figure 2.

Drawing made by child 14 (age 8). The character Tini is on the right and Pami on the left. The characters appear to have similar physical characteristics, and they are differentiated through different colored clothing

Practical Observations on the Used Approach

In two interviews, the children expressed difficulty in drawing the characters in the manner they had envisioned, with one child remarking that they did not know how to draw anything else when asked why they depicted the character in a certain position. It also became apparent that some children struggled to articulate their thoughts to the researcher or had not imagined the characters’ appearances in detail. Five children imagined two identical characters, differentiating them solely through clothing color (Figure 2). One child appeared frustrated by the questions regarding the characters’ appearances:

Researcher: “If you think about Pami’s arms and legs, or the body?”

Child 8: “I don’t know. How am I supposed to know, the story didn’t say anything about the appearances.”

When the researcher asked the children why they thought the characters looked a certain way, several were unable to provide an explanation. Only three children linked the characters’ appearances to their personalities. The final question of the interview, “How do you think children who look like Tini or Pami would usually behave?”, proved challenging, with most children unable to offer a response.

Discussion

The first aim of this study was to explore with a narrative review, what kind of methods are used when studying weight-stigma perceptions among 2–12-year-old children and what results these studies have gained. Most of the studies reviewed used quantitative research methods. These methods have advantages such as repeatability, ease of use, and cost-effectiveness, especially when dealing with large sample sizes. However, when studying children’s weight stigma as a phenomenon, the quantitative methods used, such as associating adjectives with cartoon characters, may seem too simplistic and detached from reality. For example, Harriger and Trammell (2022) found in their study that children had negative attitudes toward cartoon characters depicted as overweight, but weight stigma and discrimination were not observed when children were asked to choose a character as a friend. Thus, children’s negative attitudes may not necessarily manifest in behavior.

There has been relatively little research on children’s weight stigma using qualitative methods, but such methods have provided valuable and deeper insights into children’s thoughts and attitudes (Charsley et al., 2018; Pugmire & Lyons, 2018). Using qualitative methods, it has been observed that children do exhibit weight stigma, but it is not as obvious or straightforward as the results obtained with quantitative methods might suggest. More research is needed on children’s weight stigma, particularly using qualitative methods, to better understand the phenomenon and the factors behind it. Qualitative research holds an important place in the study of health-related phenomena, such as obesity (Barbour et al., 2007), and this type of research should also be increased in the context of weight stigma. Qualitative approaches hold promises for capturing a more nuanced, child-centered understanding of weight stigma. Techniques such as interviews and observational methods allow for a deeper exploration of the multidimensional and context-dependent nature of the stigma (Charsley et al., 2018).

In addition to considering the different methodological aspects between qualitative and quantitative research, more attention should be given to developing stigma-sensitive research methods for examining weight stigma among children. By asking children to compare and differentiate between figures of varying body types, these methodologies may inadvertently suggest to children that these differences are significant, thus potentially reinforcing or even generating weight-related biases. Quantitative methods, such as adjective association tasks with child figures, may also oversimplify the complex nature of children’s perceptions. Quantitative methods often employ forced-choice paradigms, requiring children to rank characters (Kihm, 2014; Latner & Stunkard, 2003) or assign specific attributes (e.g. Harriger & Trammell, 2022; Parnell et al., 2021), even if the distinctions between characters are not meaningful to the child. This can produce distorted results. For example, a child might view two characters as equally likable, but forced-choice methods compel a preference, leading to conclusions that may not accurately reflect the child’s true perceptions. Furthermore, a child may feel that none of the adjectives apply to the figures presented, yet the forced-choice design requires a selection, thereby distorting the results. This methodological limitation may lead to an overestimation of the prevalence and strength of negative attitudes toward overweight or obese peers (Jarvie et al., 1983). Despite these limitations, the body of research using forced-choice methods provides robust evidence of the existence of weight stigma in children (Puhl & Latner, 2007), contributing valuable insights into the phenomenon’s prevalence and social manifestations.

The second aim of this study was to test weight-stigma-related thinking in Finnish children by conducting a stigma-sensitive approach that addresses the challenges of previous approaches. Therefore, an approach which aimed to consider the results highlighted by the narrative review was planned, particularly regarding the ethics and reliability of the research methods. The present study employed a qualitative child research approach, using a drawing task and an individual interview with stimulus material that included a read-aloud story. There has been previous research, where these kinds of approaches have been used when exploring children and sensitive issues like childhood obesity. For example, Meriaux et al. (2010), used drawings and body pictograms to supplement the interviews.

The findings of this study suggest that children, when listening to a story in which no explicit comments about physical appearance are made, focus more on the events of the story, as well as the characters’ personalities and emotions, rather than their physical appearances. These findings diverge from previous research. A substantial body of evidence indicates that weight bias is prevalent among children, with negative attitudes towards individuals with larger body sizes being common (Puhl & Latner, 2007; Puhl & Lessard, 2020). Earlier studies have shown that children tend to hold negative attitudes toward peers with overweight or obesity (e.g. Harrison et al., 2016; Latner & Stunkard, 2003) and are less likely to engage in friendship behaviors with children who are overweight or obese (e.g. De La Haye et al., 2017; Harriger & Trammell, 2022). However, much of this research has relied on quantitative methods. In contrast, as with the current study, two previous qualitative studies found no evidence of apparent weight stigma in children (Charsley et al., 2018; Pugmire & Lyons, 2018). These findings suggest that the choice of methodological approach may influence our understanding of the phenomenon and the identification of children’s own perspectives.

In two studies (Carvalho et al., 2021; Fitzgerald et al., 2013), it was interestingly observed that children’s weight stigma was less pronounced when they were told that the growth of body size was due to biological factors. On the other hand, weight stigma was more pronounced when it was explained that the growth of body size was due to the individual’s own behavior. When considering individual behavior and obesity, there is previous research that children tend to combine obesity with individual choices in eating and exercise (Pugmire & Lyons, 2018; Rodgers et al., 2019). Therefore, the emergence of weight stigma in children could be influenced by upbringing and education: the growth of body size and weight gain has many different underlying factors, and the mechanisms that affect an individual’s weight are complex.

Based on the literature review, weight stigma among children is common, and the results of studies on the topic are largely consistent with each other, despite the different research methods used. Studies have shown that children have negative attitudes toward other children with overweight or obesity, and they are less likely to engage socially with them compared to children with no overweight. However, the methods where children are asked to compare different-sized and shaped characters or images of children raise the question of whether these methods reinforce the weight stigma observed in children. Children may not make similar comparisons in their everyday lives, and the research method could guide children to think that the differences between the presented characters or children are somehow significant. Therefore, the method could reinforce or even cause weight-stigma-related thinking. By using forced choice, the child may be hesitant to give a response that is not socially acceptable. Forced choice, therefore, brings the phenomenon to the surface easily, but it may not accurately reflect reality.

To our knowledge, only one previous study has employed a methodology comparable to that of the present research (Leddy, 2011). In Leddy’s study, children aged 3 to 4 were presented with a story featuring a “mean” and a “nice” character, after which they were asked to draw the characters and participate in interviews. Of the twenty-three children in that study, only two depicted the “mean” character with a larger body size than the “nice” character, indicating a minimal presence of weight bias. Similarly, no evidence of weight bias emerged in the current study. Despite similar findings, variations in study design—such as sample size, participant age, and story characteristics—should be considered.

None of the children in this study imagined a character that was noticeably overweight or obese. This finding prompts consideration of the types of characters children tend to draw. Research suggests that children are more inclined to illustrate characters with positive facial expressions and emotions, favoring pleasant and socially acceptable depictions over those that may be perceived as negative or undesirable (Cannoni et al., 2023). The absence of overweight or obese figures in the children’s drawings may therefore reflect also an implicit bias where larger body sizes are not viewed as desirable or “pleasant” characteristics.

Strengths and Limitations

The strength of the study lay in its narrative review and critical evaluation of the methods used in research on children’s weight-stigma-related thinking. It is crucial to pay even greater attention to the methods used in researching weight stigma, particularly among children, from ethical perspectives. An additional key strength of the study is the novel research approach planned to prevent conditioning children to weight stigma and minimize potential harm. The approach allowed children’s authentic voices to emerge and encouraged imaginative responses without steering them toward preconceived notions. The success of this approach in addressing these goals highlights its strengths. However, the novelty of the approach necessitates critical reflection, as its effectiveness remains largely untested, with only one prior study (Leddy, 2011) employing a similar methodology, leaving limited comparative data in the existing literature. In addition, no expert outside the research group evaluated the stigma-sensitivity of the research method; instead, the researchers assessed it based on prior literature and observations derived from it.

An important consideration in the research design was creating a safe, supportive environment for the children participating in the study. Prior research has shown that an accepting and open atmosphere is crucial for fostering honest, unguarded responses (Carter et al., 1996). While the study made efforts to establish a friendly, age-appropriate context, it is worth noting that the children only met the researcher once, which may have affected their comfort levels in fully expressing their thoughts during the interviews.

Conclusions

Weight stigma is a global issue affecting children and adolescents, with significant negative impacts on their well-being. Weight stigma in children is an important research topic, but it is essential to pay attention to research methods. It must be ensured that children are not compelled by the employed methods to choose between overly forced or binary options. In the future, research methods involving children—especially on sensitive topics such as weight stigma—must continue to be critically evaluated. Therefore, based on the findings of current literature review, it seems important to increase the use of qualitative research in studies on weight stigma.

Considering the challenges of previous methods used in studying children, no weight-stigma-related thinking was identified in the pilot study. This result underscores the need to continue developing stigma-sensitive and child-appropriate research methods to obtain reliable data on the phenomenon of children and weight stigma. This, in turn, will enable the development of measures to reduce the manifestation of weight stigma.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material 1 - Description of the literature review information retrieval

Supplemental material for A Narrative Review and a Novel Stigma-Sensitive Approach to Study Weight Stigma Among Children by Matilda J. Lintunen Terhi K. Koivumäki, Leila J. Karhunen, Aija L. Laitinen in International Journal of Qualitative Methods

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material 2 - Articles included in the literature review and their key findings

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material 3 - Fictional story - Tini and Pami’s fishing trip

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material 4 - COREQ check list

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to the diligent participants and their parents for their invaluable contribution to the study. We would also like to express our deepest gratitude to our colleagues Laura Ortju and Tuuli Paajanen, who shared their experiences and knowledge of child research methods with us.

ORCID iD

Aija L. Laitinen

Ethical Considerations

This study was conducted according to the guidelines laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki and all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines. This study has been approved by the University of Eastern Finland Committee on Research Ethics (15.12.2023, 46/2023).

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained for all participants, with written consent provided by the parents and oral assent from the children. The authors affirm that human research participants provided informed consent for publication of the images in Figures 1 and .

Authors’ Contribution

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Pilot study material preparation, data collection, analysis and narrative review were performed by Matilda J. Lintunen. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Matilda J. Lintunen and all authors commented on versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

Research data cannot be shared or published as open data, as the subjects are young children. Also, the study has been approved by the University of Eastern Finland Committee on Research Ethics on the assumption that the data would not be shared openly.*

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Barbour

Cohen

Chinnock

Peiperl

Yamey

(2007). Qualitative research: understanding patients’ needs and experiences. PLoS Medicine, 4(8). Article e258. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040258

Bengtsson

(2016). How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. NursingPlus Open, 2, 8–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.npls.2016.01.001

Cannoni

Pinto

Bombi

A. S.

(2023). Typical emotional expression in children’s drawings of the human face. Current Psychology, 42(4), 2762–2768. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01558-1

Carter

C. A.

Bottoms

B. L.

Murray

(1996). Linguistic and socioemotional influences on the accuracy of children's reports. Law and Human Behavior, 20(3), 335–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01499027

Carvalho

Peretz‐Lange

Muentener

(2021). Causal explanations for weight influence children’s social preferences: Biological‐essentialist explanations reduce, and behavioral explanations promote, preferences for thin friends. Child Development, 92(2), 682–690. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13519

Charsley

J. S.

Collins

S. C.

Hill

A. J.

(2018). The bigger picture: Young children’s perception of fatness in the context of other physical differences. Pediatric Obesity, 13(9), 558–566. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijpo.12280

De La Haye

Dijkstra

J. K.

Lubbers

M. J.

Van Rijsewijk

Stolk

(2017). The dual role of friendship and antipathy relations in the marginalization of overweight children in their peer networks: The TRAILS Study. PLoS ONE, 12(6), Article e0178130. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178130

Fitzgerald

Heary

Roddy

(2013). Causal information on children’s attitudes and behavioural intentions toward a peer with obesity. Obesity Facts, 6(3), 247–257. https://doi.org/10.1159/000351828

Gregory

A. T.

Denniss

A. R.

(2018). An Introduction to Writing Narrative and Systematic Reviews — Tasks, Tips and Traps for Aspiring Authors. Heart, Lung and Circulation, 27(7), 893–898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlc.2018.03.027

10.

Hansson

L. M.

Karnehed

Tynelius

Rasmussen

(2009). Prejudice against obesity among 10-year-olds: A nationwide population-based study. Acta Paediatrica, 98(7), 1176–1182. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1651-2227.2009.01305.x

11.

Haqq

A. M.

Kebbe

Tan

Manco

Salas

X. R.

(2021). Complexity and stigma of pediatric obesity. Childhood Obesity, 17(4), 229–240. https://doi.org/10.1089/chi.2021.0003

12.

Harriger

J. A.

Trammell

J. P.

(2022). First do no harm: Measuring weight bias beliefs in preschool-age children. Body Image, 40, 176–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2021.12.005

13.

Harrison

Rowlinson

Hill

A. J.

(2016). No fat friend of mine”: Young children’s responses to overweight and disability. Body Image, 18, 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.05.002

14.

Jarvie

G. J.

Lahey

B. B.

Graziano

Framer

(1983). Childhood obesity and social stigma: What we know and what we don’t know. Developmental Review, 3(3), 237–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(83)90015-1

15.

Kihm

H. S.

(2014). The Friendship study: An examination of weight-based stigmatization during the elementary and middle school years. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 106(2), 37–44.

16.

Kornilaki

E. N.

Cheng

(2019). Childhood obesity: Can the scale weigh popularity? Early Child Development and Care, 189(10), 1638–1646. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2017.1403433

17.

Latner

J. D.

Stunkard

A. J.

(2003). Getting worse: The stigmatization of obese children. Obesity Research, 11(3), 452–456. https://doi.org/10.1038/oby.2003.61

18.

Leddy

(2011). Preschool children’s perceptions of body size through trait associations and drawings [Master’s thesis. Toronto Metropolitan University]. https://doi.org/10.32920/ryerson.14652549

19.

Chu

Yan

A. F.

Johnson

Wang

(2021). Bidirectional relationships between weight stigma and pediatric obesity: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Obesity Reviews, 22(6), Article e13178. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.13178

20.

Mériaux

B. G.

Berg

Hellström

A.-L.

(2010). Everyday experiences of life, body and well-being in children with overweight. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 24(1), 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6712.2008.00678.x

21.

Parnell

Williamson

Lewis

Slater

(2021). Children’s attitudes and friendship behaviors toward socially stigmatized appearances: Do attitudes vary according to type of difference? Stigma and Health, 6(3), 344–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/sah0000287

22.

Pasquale

R. D.

Celsi

(2017). Stigmatization of overweight and obese peers among children. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 524. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00524

23.

Pont

S. J.

Puhl

Cook

S. R.

Slusser

(2017). Stigma experienced by children and adolescents with obesity. Pediatrics, 140(6). Article e20173034. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00524

24.

Pugmire

Lyons

A. C.

(2018). You can tell kind of about the body’: Young children, health, fitness and fatness. Sport, Education and Society, 23(6), 533–546. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2016.1265927

25.

Puhl

Latner

(2007). Stigma, obesity, and the health of the nation’s children. Psychological Bulletin, 133(4), 557–580. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.557

26.

Puhl

R. M.

Lessard

L. M.

(2020). Weight stigma in youth: Prevalence, consequences, and considerations for clinical practice. Current Obesity Reports, 9(4), 402–411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13679-020-00408-8

27.

Richardson

S. A.

Goodman

Hastorf

A. H.

Dornbusch

S. M.

(1961). Cultural uniformity in reaction to physical disabilities. American Sociological Review, 26(2), 241–247. https://doi.org/10.2307/2089861

28.

Rodgers

R. F.

Wertheim

E. H.

Damiano

S. R.

Gregg

K. J.

Paxton

S. J.

(2019). A qualitative, prospective study of children’s understanding of weight gain. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 37(3), 369–381. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12279

29.

Skinner

A. C.

Payne

Perrin

A. J.

Panter

A. T.

Howard

J. B.

Bardone-Cone

Bulik

C. M.

Steiner

M. J.

Perrin

E. M.

(2017). Implicit weight bias in children age 9 to 11 years. Pediatrics, 140(1), Article e20163936. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-3936

30.

Di Santo

(2012). Preschool children’s perceptions of overweight peers. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 10(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X11407411

31.

Tiggemann

Anesbury

(2000). Negative stereotyping of obesity in children: The role of controllability beliefs. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(9), 1977–1993. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02477.x

32.

Tiggemann

Wilson-Barrett

(1998). Children’s figure ratings: Relationship to self-esteem and negative stereotyping. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 23(1), 83–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-108x(199801)23:1<83::aid-eat10>3.0.co;2-o

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.61 MB

0.48 MB

0.37 MB

0.28 MB

0.00 MB