ArticleBMC public health2023
The influence of bystander presence on evaluations of public breastfeeding among adults in the United States.
Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn general, people tend to support private breastfeeding more than public breastfeeding, and discomfort surrounding public breastfeeding may contribute to sub-optimal rates of breastfeeding in the United States. Few studies have systematically examined situational factors that contribute to (negative) reactions to public breastfeeding. It is unclear whether the physical location or the presence of others is more influential in shaping people's evaluations of public breastfeeding. This study aimed to experimentally investigate the influence of location, bystander presence, bystander gender, and the breastfeeding woman's use of a cover on people's evaluations of breastfeeding images.
methodA sample of adults residing in the United States was randomly assigned to view an image of a breastfeeding woman in an experimental study that examined four independent variables: breastfeeding location (public vs. private), bystander presence (present vs. not present), gender of bystander (male vs. female), and use of a cover (cover vs. no cover). Participants then reported their emotional reactions to, perceptions of, and behavioral intentions toward the breastfeeding woman. In addition, participants completed measures of sexism, traditional gender role endorsement, sexual comfort, body gaze, and breastfeeding knowledge and experience.
resultsHierarchical regressions revealed no differences between private and public breastfeeding images. Perceptions of the breastfeeding woman were more favorable when she was alone than with others, and when she was covered than when she was not covered. Evaluations tended to be more favorable among participants who scored lower on hostile sexism, higher on benevolent sexism, higher on sexual comfort, and higher on breastfeeding knowledge.
conclusionThe presence of bystanders may be more consequential than the physical location in shaping reactions to public breastfeeding. These findings can be applied to improve support for public breastfeeding, which may contribute to higher breastfeeding rates and the associated public health benefits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.