More in common?: Researchers are now trying to understand just how trends in body weight spread through close social ties.
Image: iStockphoto/JulNichols
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
The people we associate with can have a powerful effect on our behavior—for better or for worse. This holds true for human health and body mass, too. The heavier our close friends and family, the heavier we are likely to be.
This correlation, described in 2007 by a team that analyzed data from the longitudinal Framingham Heart Study, is well established. But just how this transpires—whether via shared norms, common behavior or just similar environments—has been the subject of much debate.
The authors of the 2007 study proposed that social norms shared among friends and relatives might be a strong determinant of body mass index (BMI). And a new study, published online May 5 in the American Journal of Public Health, drills down to see just how these social forces might be at work. The study of more than 100 women—and hundreds of their friends and family members—however, suggests that social attitudes might not be key in determining obesity clusters after all.
"Going in as anthropologists we assumed that the norms would have a strong influence" on BMI, says Alexandra Brewis, executive director of the School of Human Evolution and Social Change at Arizona State University in Tempe. She and her colleagues found themselves surprised how small an effect the norms had on a person's BMI. Just one type of social dynamic seemed to play a statistically significant role—and that was only about 20 percent.
But a small effect is not no effect, points out James Fowler, a professor at the University of California, San Diego School of Medicine and Division of Social Sciences, and co-author of the 2007 The New England Journal of Medicine paper that described the influence of social ties on obesity rates. The finding that even 20 percent of weight status can be attributed to social norms suggests that "at least some of what is spreading are ideas about body size." And that, he says, is "incredibly exciting," as it hints at some methods to start stemming the social spread of obesity.
The influence of friends
To try to better understand the ways in which social norms might be influencing social clusters of obesity, Brewis and her colleagues interviewed 101 Arizona women aged 18 to 45—and 812 of their close social ties, including friends, spouses, family members, coworkers and others—about their attitudes toward body size. All subjects were questioned about their ideal size, their preference for being non-obese (relative to other conditions, such as being an alcoholic or blind), and how much stigma they associated with a person's being overweight or obese.
The subjects' answers correlated with their BMI (by design, half of the women were overweight or obese) and with the BMI and answers given by their social ties. Brewis and her team then tested the data against a framework of three possible pathways that might help explain why people and those they are close to have similar body sizes. The frameworks held up in the analysis: The first describes the case in which social norms between people converge "and that makes you both behave the same way," Brewis explains; the second, occurs when two people might have different social norms, but a friend's social norms "shape [the other's] behavior even if they don't internalize them"; and the third possibility—"it's not really due to the relationship at all," but rather something else that is related to body size, such as simply frequently seeing friends who are overweight.
Given the way the study was designed, however, it is quite possible that the effect of social norms is "even higher" than 20 percent, Fowler says.
The findings are by no means the final word on the influence of social norms, says Ross Hammond, director of the Center on Social Dynamics and Policy at The Brookings Institution. "It examines one kind of norm," he says. "I think this study is a good start," but, he notes, "even for these kinds of norms, there are other pathways through which this might matter." He also notes that although the study focused on a certain age range of women, it did not pull out differences that might be at work in subsets of age, BMI or demographics. "Some of the results they find may mask quite strong effects in subgroups," he says. Brewis says that her group hopes to start studying the role of social norms in different countries as well, such as in India and Paraguay.
The new study underscores just "how difficult social norms are to measure," says Hammond, who wrote a review paper on social influence and obesity that was published last year. "What we'd like to do is uncover the mechanisms that might explain the social clustering of obesity."
Would you like to see the dessert menu?
If socially gleaned attitudes are not the driving force spreading obesity among social circles, what is? "The other part could explain the spread of behavior," says Nicholas Christakis, a professor of medical sociology at Harvard Medical School and co-author of the 2007 Framingham paper.
See what we're tweeting about
4 Comments
Add Comment'Birds of a feather flock together' & 'water seeks its own level' and maybe even more apropos: 'misery loves company'....nothing really new here is it?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI saw a minivan yesterday with 6 or 7 morbidly obese women packed in; that's a support group if i ever saw one, just not much support for the poor suspension. There needs to be room for some social pressure against this epidemic without it crossing over to 'hating'. It's really sad and disgusting to see society moving this direction but what to do? Many of them won't just die with heart attacks but be in and out of hospitals for years while they slowly die with diabetes, skin diseases, etc etc. I know one guy whose wife is a whopper and she's mostly wheelchair bound and in and out of the hospital on the public dime. What a pathetic existence and not good for a country's health either!
I believe obesity issues began back when elementary gym programs were cut, continuous recessions caused increased stress and technological advances put people into seated jobs.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDon't worry, as food production stagnates and populations grow the cost of excess eating will counter act this trend. Nature is self cleaning.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thismichalshome:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJr High and High School physical education programs ceased to be mandatory due to a misconception that physical health and mental acuity were unrelated.
Since a direct correlation has been consistently and repeatedly shown, various reasons have been pursued to deny reinstatement of these vital programs in schools.
Such reasons as fiscal come due in far higher and earlier medical costs, psychological problems, and resultant infrastructure costs across the board, from insurance, building, self-medication, to increased pressure on government to care for a population increasingly handicapped by ill health from sedentary lifestyles.
Long-term healthy lifestyles and activities had historically been promoted by the inclusion of instruction in a range of physical skills and testing of strength, cardiovascular fitness, and other parameters of health to adolescents and preadolescents.
A complete education must include a wide variety of physical skills. Only in this way will our species continue in physical activity as adults.
Our mating preferences do not change at the same rate as social norms. We are bound by slower evolution in this. Most individuals prefer the same body shape that has denoted health for tens or hundreds of thousands of years, while the lightning-sudden trend to obesity occurring due to overpopulation/sedentary behavior (perhaps due to withdrawal from induced stress from overly-dense populations - cultural anthropology has studied such issues and offers some well-supported hypotheses), food technology aimed at maximizing profit (by appealing to sensory structures evolved before we domesticated animals and increased their obesity!), and even political-correctness in attempting to dowonplay the seriousness the obesity problem.
Normative pressures on behavior are perhaps the most significant single factor in inclusion of physical activity throughout life. Since the social norm is now dominated by overweight members of our species, expect that returning to a healthier norm will be extremely difficult and vigorously opposed.
Do remember that earlier in the past century, tobacco smoking was used to diminish appetite, and that the problem of sedentarism is deeply ingrained in the cultural lifestyle. Even emotional bias toward activity is now overwhelmingly corrupted by vicarious "professional spectator sport", which has only existed for a bit over a century. Correlation.