Discuss risk and protective factors for health and well being

This essay will be discussing risk and protective factors for health and wellbeing. Health psychology is
an area of psychology which looks into the prevention and management of disease and illness; the
promotion and maintenance of health; the factors that contribute to illness; and the improvement
of the health care system and health policy. Risk factors are anything that affects a human and
increases their stress, reduces ability to cope or opportunities for growth. Protective Factors are
anything that will buffer the risk, threat; something that is a support to the person, an aid to help
cope, reduce stress, provide opportunities for growth. They are important to identify in health
psychology as the identification of factors can lead to the mitigation of risk factors or exploitation of
protective factors in order to improve health and wellbeing. Examples of risk factors for obesity
include parental obesity, endocrine disorders, sedentary activity and low socioeconomic status.
Examples of protective factors for obesity include eating breakfast, regular physical activity and self-
efficacy. Risk and protective factors of obesity were investigated in Haworth et al (2008) and Herman
and Mack (1975).
 
The aim of Haworth et al (2008) was to investigate the heritability of BMI and obesity. The method
consisted of a twin study that investigated a large UK representative sample of twins-more than
2000 same sex pairs at 7 years old and more than 3500 same-sex pairs at 10 years old. Parents of the
twins filled out questionnaires with measures of the children's height and weight. BMI was
calculated and based on this participants were categorised with measures of the children's height
and weight. BMI correlations between monozygotic twins were then compared to BMI correlations
between dizygotic twins. They found that BMI (not just obesity) was highly heritable (0.60-0.74). This
suggests that not only obesity, but BMI more generally is genetically based. This is an important
finding because it can inform clinicians of the genetic (and therefore non-behavioural) determinants
of obesity and plan for the treatment of patients accordingly. Therefore, obesity and BMI are, to a
large extent, genetically determined.

Risk factors found in this study include genetics and diet. Protective factors include age and low BMI.
A strength of the study is that it included a large sample of both monozygotic and dizygotic twins.
However, twins may not be generalisable to the general population as twins have a differing genetic
heritability as opposed to normal siblings. This is important to note since it shows that genetic
predisposition is a risk factor, as shown by the high correlation of 0.60-0.74. A limitation is that the
study was correlational and not causational, meaning that the relationship between obesity and
genetics is questionable without a direct link. This is furthered by the fact that obesity is not a
correlation of 1.0, meaning that there must be other factors which affect obesity, such as a poor SES,
etc. Even this can be furthered, as the study took a reductionist approach; it only accounted for
genetics, rather than other possibly contributing factors such as social conditions or the
environment. These show that genetic predisposition are strong risk factors to obesity, but does not
account for all factors which may lead to obesity.
 
The aim of Herman and Mack (1975) was to see if preloads would results in dieters overreating. The
method consisted of giving 45 female dieters and non-dieters tubs of ice-cream in a fake taste test,
after making them eat either 0, 1 or 2 milkshakes which acted as a pre-load. They were given 3
different tubs of ice-cream. They were given 10 minutes to rate them. They were then told that they
could eat as much as they wanted. Afterwards, they answered a questionnaire to assess whether
they were restrained eaters. The results showed that restrained eaters from both milkshake
conditions ate more ice-cream than those that had no milkshake. A positive correlation found
between amount eaten after 2 pre-loads and a high restraint score. Therefore, the more people
attempted to diet, the more they ate after 2 milkshake pre-loads. They concluded that the study
supports the restraint theory as it demonstrates how the pre-load worked at loosening the dieters
restraints and then how this lead to overeating and counter-regulation-the dieting had a counter
effect and made them eat more rather than less.

Risk factors found in this study include restraints and access to unhealthy foods. Protective factors
include a healthy diet and not being a restrained eater. A strength of the study is that there is
method triangulation, therefore increasing the internal validity of the study. As the study used both
questionnaires (qualitative) and surveys (quantitative) by asking the participants to rate the ice
cream and explain whether they were restrained eaters or not, it increases the internal validity as
the study establishes a strong correlation between the treatment and outcome. Method
triangulation backs up the findings of risk and protective factors affecting obesity, where it looks at
availability of foods and the high intakes of dairy products (ice cream). The ice cream that the
participants were given might have satisfied their taste which caused them to continue eating,
showing how environmental factors affected the obesity rates of the participants. In addition to this,
the restraint theory is supported as it shows how if the participants were restrained eaters, they
would have eaten more as seen in the results of the study. However, a limitation of the study is that
due to the study being done under lab conditions, there would have been a low ecological validity,
meaning the risk factors are inapplicable to other settings. The participants may have thought that
eating the ice cream was part of the experiment and therefore convincing them to eat some more.
Had the experiment been done in a natural setting, the participants would have behaved more like
themselves in a familiar setting, therefore restraining them from eating anymore. This would have
then affected their health and wellbeing.

In conclusion, while this essay looked at risk and protective factors, the studies used showed that
they could be influenced by both biological (genetics and diet) and environmental (restraint and
access to unhealthy food) factors. In Haworth (2008), it was found that obesity was highly heritable
and looked at the difference between monozygotic and dizygotic twins. However, in Herman and
Mack (1975), restraints and access to unhealthy foods were more so investigated, therefore
influencing health and wellbeing.