Distinguishing the affective and cognitive bases of implicit attitudes to improve prediction of food choices

Eating behaviors largely result from automatic processes. Yet, in existing research, automatic or implicit attitudes toward food often fail to predict eating behaviors. Applying findings in cognitive neuroscience research, we propose and find that a central reason why implicit attitudes toward food are not good predictors of eating behaviors is that implicit attitudes are driven by two distinct constructs that often have diverging evaluative consequences: the automatic affective reactions to food (e.g., tastiness; the affective basis of implicit attitudes) and the automatic cognitive reactions to food (e.g., healthiness; the cognitive basis of implicit attitudes). More importantly, we find that the affective and cognitive bases of implicit attitudes directly and uniquely influence actual food choices under different conditions. While the affective basis of implicit attitude is the main driver of food choices, it is the only driver when cognitive resources during choice are limited. The cognitive basis of implicit attitudes uniquely influences food choices when cognitive resources during choice are plentiful but only for participants low in impulsivity. Researchers interested in automatic processes in eating behaviors could thus benefit by distinguishing between the affective and cognitive bases of implicit attitudes.

Public beliefs about and attitudes towards bipolar disorder: testing theory based models of stigma

BACKGROUND

Given the vast literature into public beliefs and attitudes towards schizophrenia and depression, there is paucity of research on attitudes towards bipolar disorder despite its similar prevalence to schizophrenia. This study explored public beliefs and attitudes towards bipolar disorder and examined the relationship between these different components of stigma.

METHOD

Using an online questionnaire distributed via email, social networking sites and public institutions, 753 members of the UK population were presented with a vignette depicting someone who met DSM-IV criteria for bipolar disorder. Causal beliefs, beliefs about prognosis, emotional reactions, stereotypes, and social distance were assessed in response to the vignette. Preacher and Hayes procedure for estimating direct and indirect effects of multiple mediators was used to examine the relationship between these components of stigma.

RESULTS

Bipolar disorder was primarily associated with positive beliefs and attitudes and elicited a relatively low desire for social distance. Fear partially mediated the relationship between stereotypes and social distance. Biomedical causal beliefs reduced desire for social distance by increasing compassion, whereas fate causal beliefs increased it through eliciting fear. Psychosocial causal beliefs had mixed effects.

LIMITATIONS

The measurement of stigma using vignettes and self-report questionnaires has implications for ecological validity and participants may have been reluctant to reveal the true extent of their negative attitudes.

CONCLUSIONS

Dissemination of these findings to people with bipolar disorder has implications for the reduction of internalised stigma in this population. Anti-stigma campaigns should attend to causal beliefs, stereotypes and emotional reactions as these all play a vital role in discriminatory behaviour towards people with bipolar disorder.