Search

Social influence is a key determinant of health behaviors and outcomes. Research in the social network tradition emphasizes social structural mechanisms like network content (i.e., the degree to which particular attitudes, attributes, or behaviors are present in the network) and social proximity (i.e., opportunities for social interaction). In contrast, psychologists are oriented toward the individual, identifying how personality traits like self-monitoring affect susceptibility to peer pressure. Here, we integrate social network and personality approaches, examining social influence on body size using surveys of 379 adults with dependent children. Our findings suggest that the association between social network body size composition and respondent BMI is contingent on both individual susceptibility to influence (i.e., high self-monitoring) and social proximity (i.e., opportunities for co-eating). These results indicate that individuals embedded in social networks bring unique sets of social skills and orientations to interactions, potentially influencing the flow of content across networks., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Previous research has documented social contagion in obesity and related health behaviors, but less is known about the social processes underlying these patterns. Focusing on married or cohabitating couples, we simultaneously explore three potential social mechanisms influencing obesity: normative body size, social control, and behavior modeling. We analyze the association between partner characteristics and the obesity-related health behaviors of focal respondents, comparing the effects of partners' body type, partners' attempts to manage respondents' eating behaviors, and partners' own health behaviors on respondents' health behaviors (physical activity, fruit and vegetable consumption, and fast food consumption). Data on 215 partners are extracted from a larger study of social mechanisms of obesity in family and community contexts conducted in 2011 in the United States. Negative binomial regression models indicate that partner behavior is significantly related to respondent behavior (p < .001), net of controls. These results are suggestive of a behavior modeling mechanism in obesity-related patterns of consumption and physical activity. In contrast, we find little support for the influence of normative body size or partner social control in this sample, though generalizations about the relevance of these processes may be inappropriate. These results underscore the importance of policies and interventions that target dyads and social groups, suggesting that adoption of exercise or diet modifications in one individual is likely to spread to others, creating a social environment characterized by mutual reinforcement of healthy behavior., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

The deleterious mental health effects associated with the COVID‐19 pandemic are increasingly apparent, however, questions remain about the extent to which pandemic‐related stressor exposure has contributed to increased psychological distress among an already disadvantaged group, individuals with disabilities. The first aim of the study was to examine the distribution of pandemic‐related stressors across multiple dimensions—employment, personal and family finances, personal relationships, and quality of social life—among individuals with and without disabilities. The second aim of the study was to examine the association between a composite COVID‐19 stressor score and two mental health outcomes—depressive and anxiety symptoms—among the two subsamples. The study used quota‐based online survey data (N = 2043) collected in the summer of 2020 from adults (18 and older) residing in the Intermountain West, half of whom had a self‐reported disability. Study results demonstrated that individuals with disabilities experienced pandemic‐related stressors at significantly higher rates relative to their non‐disabled counterparts. Further, pandemic stressor exposure was associated with greater negative effects on their psychological well‐being. We argue that the COVID‐19 pandemic is generating a secondary mental illness pandemic, and that individuals with disabilities are affected by it at significantly higher proportions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]