The present study experimentally investigated the way in which exposure to various aetiological explanations of anorexia nervosa (AN) differentially affected stigmatisation and behavioural intention outcomes. University students (N = 161) were randomly assigned to read one of four aetiological vignettes presenting the causes of AN as biological/genetic, socio-cultural, environmental, or multifactorial. Results indicate that those who received a socio-cultural explanation made stronger socio-cultural causal attributions, fewer biological/genetic causal attributions, and were significantly less willing to sign a health insurance petition for AN. Unexpectedly, the multifactorial group considered individuals with AN as more responsible and blameworthy for their condition. Overall, findings were comparative with previous research and partially support the propositions of attribution theory. Results also suggest that by conceptualising the aetiology of AN as biological or genetic, or at least increasing one's knowledge of these contributing factors, it may be possible to decrease the level of blame-based stigma associated with AN.

It is frequently reported that clinicians across a range of professional disciplines experience strong negative reactions toward patients with anorexia nervosa (AN). The present study aimed to develop, evaluate, and compare the effectiveness of two different educational programs, based on an etiological framing model. Participants were medical students (N = 41) from an Australian University, who were randomly assigned to one of three conditions (biogenetic intervention vs. multifactorial intervention vs. control). Outcome attitudinal/stigma data were collected pre- and post-intervention, and at 8 weeks follow-up. Results indicated intervention participations exhibited significantly lower volitional stigma scores compared to the control group, who exhibited no change in attitudes or stigma. Specifically, intervention participants had significantly lower total ED stigma scores, levels of blame, perceptions of AN as a selfish/vain illness, and viewed sufferers as less responsible for their illness at post-intervention. These reductions were maintained at follow-up. Overall, the study provides preliminary evidence that brief targeted interventions can assist in reducing levels of volitional stigma toward AN.

Addressing the internal determinants of dysfunctional eating behaviours (e.g. food cravings) in the prevention and treatment of obesity has been increasingly recognised. This study compared Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT) to Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) for food cravings in adults who were overweight or obese (N = 83) in an 8-week intervention. Outcome data were collected at baseline, post-intervention, and at 6- and 12-months follow-up. Overall, EFT and CBT demonstrated comparable efficacy in reducing food cravings, one's responsiveness to food in the environment (power of food), and dietary restraint, with Cohen's effect size values suggesting moderate to high practical significance for both interventions. Results also revealed that both EFT and CBT are capable of producing treatment effects that are clinically meaningful, with reductions in food cravings, the power of food, and dietary restraint normalising to the scores of a non-clinical community sample. While reductions in BMI were not observed, the current study supports the suggestion that psychological interventions are beneficial for food cravings and both CBT and EFT could serve as vital adjunct tools in a multidisciplinary approach to managing obesity.

The current study supports the hypothesis that psychological intervention is beneficial for treating psychological comorbidities of obesity and points to the role mental health issues may play in this area.

BackgroundThis study aimed to establish consensus on the expression and distinction of disordered eating in pregnancy to improve awareness across various health professions and inform the development of a pregnancy-specific assessment instrument.MethodsA three-round modified Delphi method was used with two independent panels. International clinicians and researchers with extensive knowledge on and/or clinical experience with eating disorders formed the first panel and were recruited using structured selection criteria. Women who identified with a lived experience of disordered eating in pregnancy formed the second panel and were recruited via expressions of interest from study advertising on pregnancy forums and social media platforms. A systematic search of academic and grey literature produced 200 sources which were used to pre-populate the Round I questionnaire. Additional items were included in Round II based on panel feedback in Round I. Consensus was defined as 75% agreement on an item.ResultsOf the 102 items presented to the 26 professional panel members and 15 consumer panel members, 75 reached consensus across both panels. Both panels clearly identified signs and symptoms of disordered eating in pregnancy and endorsed a number of clinical features practitioners should consider when delineating disordered eating symptomatically from normative pregnancy experiences.ConclusionA list of signs and symptoms in consensus was identified. The areas of collective agreement may be used to guide clinicians in clinical practice, aid the development of psychometric tools to detect/assess pregnancy-specific disordered eating, in addition to serving as starting point for the development of a core outcome set to measure disordered eating in pregnancy.