The Perfect Little Bump: Does theMedia Portrayal of PregnantCelebrities Influence PrenatalAttachment?Jayne Krisjanous, James E. Richard, and Aaron GazleyVictoria University of Wellington
Celebrities are by no means a new phenomenon inmarketing with their attractiveness and potentialpersuasiveness well established in the literature.Today, media provides greater access to scrutiny andinstantaneous insight into celebrity public and per-sonal life than at any other point in history (Choi, Lee,& Kim, 2005). With a “celebrity” defined as someonewho has attention-getting, interest-riveting, and profit-generating value because of their fame (Rein, Kottler,& Stoller, 1987), it is no surprise that their lifestyles,opinions, youth, wealth, beauty, or, conversely, failuresare attractive to media audiences. A person who gen-erates intense media coverage can become a powerfulsource of influence, forming an important conduit forconsumer engagement, reference, and social impactamong those who see them as aspirational (Brown,Basil, & Bocarnea, 2003; Choi, Lee, & Kim, 2005;Kohut, 2000; O’Reilly & Braedley, 2008). Over threedecades of media, agenda-setting research indicatesthe media is important in not just what audiencesthink about, but also in how those issues are framed(McCombs & Shaw, 1993), adding further weight to thenotion that the portrayal of celebrity lifestyle can beused as a tool for fostering of consumer interests andattitudes.
A seemingly important component of a femalecelebrity’s expertise and cultural value is the abilityto sustain a thin body shape, or lose weight quickly
to regain one (Cunningham, 2002; Gow, Lydecker,Lamanna, & Mazzeo, 2012). With thinness consideredan important feature of beauty in contemporary society,extant academic literature from several disciplines hasvigorously debated the extent to which thin celebritiesand models in the media can influence or inspire in-dividuals who are susceptible to such images (Richins,1991, 1995). For celebrities, the years where many ofthe personal qualities admired by audiences are themost attractive are also the same years where fertil-ity and childbearing are at their peak. It comes as nosurprise then that there is a steady flow of pregnantcelebrities and newborn celebrity babies in the media(Tyler, 2001).
Celebrity pregnancy stimulates a lot of interest, notonly because it is an event that will have an outcome (ababy) of substantial interest to the media industry andits followers, but also because it invariably impacts onthe physical appearance and lifestyle of the celebrityinvolved. Indeed, success in having babies, or not, isan important part of celebrity achievement for the me-dia. Take for instance Jennifer Anniston’s unsuccessfulquest for a pregnancy, which has in part earned hera reputation of a “tabloid tragedy.” Hine (2013) sug-gests the media has created a new female archetype,the “yummy mummy,” which encapsulates the conceptsof “glamour,” “attractiveness,” and “mother” (Goodwin& Huppatz, 2010).
Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 31(9): 758–773 (September 2014)View this article online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/mar
On the consumer side, pregnancy forms an impor-tant consumption market for goods and services, for ex-ample, health care, personal and fashion goods, house-hold appliances, furniture, and education, in order tosupport transition into a new life stage (Green-Raleigh,Lawrence, Chen, Divine, & Prue, 2005; Schaninger &Danko, 1993; Wilkes, 1995). It stands to reason thatmedia attention drawn to celebrities having babies pro-vides a vital and valued aid for this specialist mater-nity market, whether through news and magazine arti-cles, celebrity commentaries on pregnancy Web sites, orproduct endorsements. Despite this increased attentionbeing paid to pregnant celebrities, there is limited aca-demic research that investigates the impact they haveon pregnant women’s attitudes and behavior. This isparticularly important given that pregnant women, es-pecially those experiencing pregnancy for the first time,are undergoing a unique event with little or no experi-ence, making them potentially susceptible to influence(Davies et al., 2010).
In light of the increasing commercialization of preg-nancy and societal interest in pregnant celebrities, theexpansion of knowledge related to the use of pregnantcelebrities in the media in women’s health marketingand related disciplines is timely (Gentile, 2011), espe-cially given that celebrity attraction is an establishedmarketing vehicle used to endorse and promote prod-ucts that appeal to pregnant women with an interest inpregnant celebrities. It is vital to better understand theprocess through which pregnant celebrities influencepregnant women, and whether the mechanisms that op-erate in nonpregnant contexts hold during pregnancy.Furthermore, understanding the motivators and “waysof knowing” pregnant women use as a basis for decisionmaking will assist marketers and health profession-als in their approach and engagement with pregnantwomen and assist improvement in pregnancy outcomes.
Keel and Nataraajan (2012) call for future researchin the area of ethical marketing to vulnerable con-sumers using celebrities. Although Keel and Nataraa-jan (2012) cite the young, elderly, and functionally illit-erate to exemplify the “vulnerable,” there is evidencethat pregnant women also fall into the category of“vulnerable consumers” because of their relative in-experience and potential reliance on pregnant celebri-ties for social proof. With this in mind, this researchaims to investigate whether celebrity messages directlyor indirectly influence an important success factor inpregnancy—maternal prenatal attachment that is theemotional attachment embracing feelings of affiliationand affection by the mother to the developing baby(DePietro, 2010; Schumacher & Meleis, 1994). The re-lationships between pregnant celebrity attraction, theconsumer’s usual concern for their own personal ap-pearance and weight gain, pregnancy body image, andprenatal attachment are measured and tested. Thestudy makes a significant contribution by extendingthe current celebrity attraction knowledge and expand-ing the understanding of the potential impact this in-fluence (positive or negative) may have over pregnant
women. Davies et al. (2010) investigate how expectantand new mothers navigate their way through the novelliminal and consumption space of pregnancy and moth-erhood, proposing that their vulnerability “often leadsthem to spaces that have become increasingly marke-tized” (p. 384). Extending Baker, Gentry, and Ritten-burg’s (2005) model of consumer vulnerability to thepregnancy and new motherhood context, Davies et al.(2010) conclude that ideologies of medical polices, legis-lation, and media representation are amplified withinthe extended market logic that dominates the mother-ing marketplace, encouraging consumption as a meansof coping with role transition and exacerbating con-sumer vulnerability.
The remainder of the paper is structured as follows.First, an overview of the literature is provided. Next,the proposed theoretical model guiding the study thatdraws upon a discussion of related multidisciplinary lit-erature is outlined. In doing so, hypotheses that relateto pregnant celebrity attraction and prenatal attach-ment outcomes are presented. Second, the empiricalstudy that was performed among pregnant consumersis outlined. This is followed by study results, discussion,and implications for academic researchers and thosewho design and develop maternity products or commu-nicate with pregnant audiences. Finally, limitations tothe study are addressed and opportunities for furtherresearch suggested.
BACKGROUND
With many popular celebrities in the childbearing agerange, exposure of pregnant women to media coverageof pregnant celebrities, written as “gossip” or critiques,can be extensive in lifestyle and specialist magazines.Articles cover a wide range of topics, such as weightgain of less fortunate celebrities, clothing choices, fam-ily relationships, and dramatic birth stories (Gentile,2011; Hine, 2013; Sha & Kirkman, 2009). Along withother media (television, Internet, cinema), the informa-tion communicated about celebrities and their behaviorin pregnancy can be persuasive and aspirational. Evenpregnancy Web sites that appear to promote informa-tion based on scientific or more medicalized points ofview include Web pages on celebrities, who often ap-pear to act in direct conflict to the more formal and sci-entific advice. Furthermore, increasingly soap operashave been noted for their delivery of health messages,both intended and unintended in actors’ scripts andexperiences (Dutta-Bergman, 2006).
The now infamous photo of Demi Moore’s heavilypregnant naked abdomen on the front cover of Van-ity Fair magazine in 1991 has severed strong culturaltaboos regulating exposure of the pregnant body in pop-ular media (Longhurst, 2005; Tyler, 2001). Indeed, to-day the celebrity pregnant body has been thrust from itsmodest and secretive state into the glare of the medialimelight, where it can be quite happily watched withavid interest by media audiences, in a process called
THE PERFECT LITTLE BUMP 759Psychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
“bump watching.” Representation of celebrity focusesdisplay of the celebrity “pregnancy bump” for readers’assessment and scrutiny. The “bump” must show ade-quate expansion commensurate with a baby-producingpregnancy, yet allow for bikini wearing till late in thepregnancy. Indeed pregnant Hollywood bodies appearto have an uncanny ability to avoid the normal physio-logical fat storage of pregnancy that occurs over severalparts of the body and confine it to a midsection “bump”only.
For many pregnant women, celebrity information isconsidered for interest and entertainment value only, oras an adjunct to more formalized information. Howeverfor others, it may be interpreted as a useful or legiti-mate means of learning and “knowing,” particularly forthose who have a limited knowledge or experience baseto draw from for this life stage. Images of a celebrityduring pregnancy can serve as a point of comparison,or guide, as to how one should look, dress, or feel duringthis period (Gentile, 2011; Hine, 2013; Sha & Kirkman,2009). Recent public opinion that celebrity exemplarsinfluence or cause change in pregnancy consumerattitudes and behavior is evident by the VictoriaBeckham “Too Posh to Push” claim reported initially inthe popular media during the early 2000s (Duckworth,2001; Klein, 2004; Laurence, 2001; Martin, 2001;Womersley, 2002). Formerly known as “Posh Spice,”Victoria Beckham was said to be apparently reluctantto labor, especially through the second stage. By optingfor a cesarean section, she aimed to avoid unnecessarydamage to her anatomy (Feinmann, 2002; Martin,2001; Womersley, 2002). This claim has led to some de-bate in the academic literature as to whether women’sreluctance to “push” in the second stage of labor is areason for the increase in the rate of cesarean sectionthroughout the Western World. Although it is generallythought by clinicians that factors other than maternalrequest alone account for the increase in cesareanprocedures, any collective change in pregnant con-sumers’ wishes causes significant implications to birthprocesses and the management of obstetric health care(Lee & Kirkman, 2008, Weaver, Statham, & Richards,2007).
Researchers investigating thinness, a term com-monly used in Western media as an indicator of beauty,have been interested in how these values might beinternalized by female consumers who are suscepti-ble to such images (Bower, 2001; Dittmar, Halliwell,& Stirling, 2009; Richins, 1991; Tiggemann, Polivy, &Hargreaves, 2009). Findings indicate that for womenwho have internalized the thin ideal images popular-izing and forming positive impressions of thinness andweight control in female audiences are perpetuated bymodels or celebrities deemed as attractive and suc-cessful (Bower, 2001; Dittmar, Halliwell, & Stirling,2009; Richins, 1991; Tiggemann, Polivy, & Hargreaves,2009). However, despite emerging academic researchinto the type and extent of pregnant celebrity relatedfocus in the media (e.g., Cunningham, 2002; Hine, 2013;Roth, Homer, & Fenwick, 2012), there is little to di-
rectly link the media to pregnant celebrity influenceon pregnant audiences. Therefore, the current studycan be considered timely, as it attempts to provide in-sight into whether media and celebrity influence is rele-vant to consumer behavior knowledge about pregnancy,particularly in forming attitudes around the weightgain of pregnancy, a greater part of which is essen-tial to ensure a healthy development and birth weightfor the baby (Ashdown-Lambert, 2005; Chomitz, Che-ung, & Lieberman, 1995; Fowles & Feucht, 2004). Atthe present time, little is known as to whether thesame mechanism through which societal attitudes to-ward thinness, portrayal of celebrities, and the mediacome together to influence nonpregnant female con-sumers operates in the same manner in the pregnancycontext (Richins, 1991, 1995). Current literature is di-vided as to whether pregnant women are immune orprotected from the normal demand for thinness. Whileauthors such as Clark and Ogden (1999) and Devine,Bove, and Olson (2000) suggest that pregnancy is atime of freedom or liberation from the sexualized de-mands for female thinness in Western culture, oth-ers believe that these same demands are increasinglybeing applied to women in pregnancy. Patterson andO’Malley (2006) suggest that the media representationof pregnant celebrities in celebrity-obsessed cultureshave contributed to the erosion of traditional respitethat women used to have during pregnancy. As obe-sity is a major focus for health promotion and socialmarketing endeavors (Rayner, 2007), pregnant womenare now cautioned to focus on the necessary and de-sirable “healthy” weight gain of pregnancy and avoidan excessive amount of pregnancy weight gain so thatexcess postpartum weight “problems,” are not experi-enced. This is even more motivating when pregnantcelebrities seem to achieve it so easily (Royal College ofMidwives (RCOM), 2010).
Increasingly, however, the notion that celebritiescan market ideas and model positive lifestyle behaviorshas become accepted and useful in applications such associal marketing (e.g., Cismaru, Lavack, & Markewich,2009; DeBar et al., 2009) and the dissemination ofhealth information messages through television soapoperas (Dutta-Bergman, 2006). Fetal development re-search stemming from what was originally known asthe Barker hypothesis points to the intrauterine envi-ronment as a critical time, not only for the neonataland infancy period, but as a factor that may affect ababy’s health much later in life (Barker & Clark, 1997).The incidences of diseases, such as diabetes and heartdisease, have all been linked to the prenatal environ-ment as an influential factor (De Boo & Harding, 2006;Revington, 2004; Vickers, Breier, McCarthy, & Gluck-man, 2003). Sufficiently persuasive positive pregnancybehaviors and attitudes displayed by celebrities in themedia might well be emulated by receptive audiences.The use of positive celebrity appeals and role model-ing targeting behavior change that maximizes the in-trauterine environment and health of the developingbaby prior to birth (and even into his/her adult life)
760 KRISJANOUS, RICHARD, AND GAZLEYPsychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
could be a powerful tool for those involved in preg-nancy healthcare marketing. In light of the above, theresearch model and hypotheses for the study are nowpresented.
THE RESEARCH MODEL ANDHYPOTHESES
The conceptual model used to guide the study andexamine the complex relationships between pregnantcelebrity attraction and prenatal attachment is de-picted in Figure 1. It is important to note that the con-text of the model is celebrity pregnancy attraction, asperceived by the pregnant respondent. In the followingsections, the constructs chosen as influential in the out-come are discussed and justified. Hypotheses are alsoadvanced drawing upon relevant literature.
Celebrity attraction is the extent to which a person re-lies on celebrities for image cues, and serves as a poten-tial source of vicarious learning and behavior adoption(Longhurst, 2005). Celebrity attraction may interferewith the setting of realistic goals, and satisfaction withself, leading to concerns regarding the role celebritiesplay in the lives and behaviors of their admirers, par-ticularly if these admirers strive to achieve unrealisticgoals to the detriment of their own health and well-being (Ashe & McCutcheon, 2001; Maltby, Giles, Bar-ber, & McCutcheon, 2005; Stever, 2011).
McCracken’s (1989) Meaning Transfer Model sug-gests that endorser appeals in the media can be trans-formational, in that if a consumer adopts the actionsor products the celebrity is using or endorsing, theythemselves will acquire the desired attributes of thecelebrity. The media acts as an intermediary withtechnology promoting greater and more current trans-mission of images. Hirschman and Thompson (1997)found that celebrity images stood out as particularlyprominent in consumer self-referential interpretations.
They also noted that television programs, magazines,and motion pictures inherently function as informalcommunication channels transporting certain lifestylecues. Additionally, with mass media texts not viewedwith the same cultivated skepticism as advertising,these modes may have an even greater impact on con-sumers’ preferences.
The extent to which a consumer mimics or uses acelebrity as a reference point for their own decisionsand lifestyle referencing can vary. Over recent years,there has been a movement away from simplistic in-terpretation of the processes through which celebritiesimpact audiences to foster effects, such as body imagedistortion. Mere exposure is too simplistic an expla-nation, but rather, audiences are believed to be activeusers and meaning makers as opposed to passive re-cipients (Giles, 2003; Hirschman & Thompson, 1997;Livingstone, 1998). Several factors have been shown tobe significant in the extent to which celebrity attrac-tion is influential. For example, at a more extreme endof celebrity attraction, celebrity worship occurs whenintense parasocial relationships with celebrities areformed (Giles, 2002; Maltby et al., 2005).
Maltby et al. (2005) found that any links withcelebrity worship (the extreme end of attraction) andbody image tend to have dissipated by adulthood, ten-tatively suggesting that growth and development, alongwith a level of resistance acquired over time to theconstant exposure to idealized images had somehownegated the effect in adult respondents. With most ex-tant literature using only young or college/universitysamples to investigate celebrity influence and its ef-fects, the findings may not necessarily hold for preg-nancy. As pregnancy is an experience represented inthe media by models and celebrities who tend to be intheir late twenties or early thirties (Hine, 2013), it maymean that the process of constant exposure has not be-come “old news” by adulthood, as it is unlikely thatmost adolescents would have undergone any compari-son process due to their lack of situational involvement,thereby not having built up any resistance.
Pregnancy and the physical changes it brings aboutis also a new or certainly infrequent experience, mean-ing that those who might compare have little in their
THE PERFECT LITTLE BUMP 761Psychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
experience banks to temper what is seen in the media.Therefore, the findings in the literature that compari-son effects are gone by adulthood, may not hold in thiscontext. Many young and more vulnerable consumers,or those who are highly concerned for their physical ap-pearance, may through a process of social comparisonfind celebrities aspirational, particularly because of theregard in which they are held in society.
Weight gain in pregnancy is an essential part ofnormal physical adaptation to pregnancy, along withincreasing uterine growth, a sign that maternal nu-trition is adequate for fetal growth to be occurring(Chomitz, Cheung, & Lieberman, 1995). Several clin-ical studies have been conducted that consistently linkprenatal weight gain with birth weight. Low maternalweight gain and poor-quality nutrition is a major factorin low infant birth weight or being “small for dates,”a condition correlated with a poorer health prognosis(Ashdown-Lambert, 2005; Chomitz, Cheung, & Lieber-man, 1995; Fowles & Feucht, 2004). The main factorsapparent in women most likely to have poor weight gainand poor nutritional intake are lower income and be as-sociated with other unhealthy behaviors, such as smok-ing along with poorer education, knowledge, and healthcare (Ashdown-Lambert, 2005; Chomitz, Cheung, &Lieberman, 1995; Fowles & Feucht, 2004). More re-cently, however, the popular press has made referenceto the term “pregorexia” in order to explain voluntaryrestricted intake through dieting or calorie restrictionin pregnancy, similar to an eating disorder, where themother purposefully starves herself to avoid any signif-icant weight gain. Although at the present time there isscant research, reference to this term as a phenomenonis beginning to appear in health academic literature(e.g., Mathieu, 2009). For most women, however, theoverall trend is for excessive weight gain and over-weight during pregnancy and Mathieu (2009) claimsthat the incidence of pregorexia-type conditions in thepregnant population is in fact rare. However, with goodmedical evidence to support controlling weight gain toavoid problems associated with factors, such as a largefor dates baby, gestational diabetes, elevated bloodpressure, and adiposity in offspring, there is pressureon women to stay within recommended weight gain lim-its. This pressure can be exacerbated by frequent expo-sure to pregnant celebrities whose ability to stay slim inpregnancy and “bounce back rapidly” postpartum is notexplained by their restricted intakes and strict exerciseregimes in reality, but framed rather as “self-control”(Roth, Homer, & Fenwick, 2011). A study by the UnitedKingdom RCOM found that 59% of postnatal respon-dents felt that celebrity culture made them feel morepressured to lose weight quickly (RCOM, 2010). How-ever, these aspirations may be unachievable based onthe resources available to them.
Given that existing findings in the literature haveestablished that a relationship exists between non-pregnant consumer self-image and attitudes towardweight control and perception of attractiveness throughthe influence of celebrities, it stands to reason that
a pregnant consumer might well be influenced by apregnant celebrity in the same manner (Maltby et al.,2005). Therefore, in consideration of the current stateof celebrity attraction research, the first hypothesis is:
Usual Concern for Physical Appearanceand Pregnant Celebrity Attraction
Concern for physical appearance is an enduring per-sonal characteristic described as the level of interestshown in maintaining or increasing one’s perceivedphysical appearance and thus attractiveness (Nete-meyer, Burton, & Lichtenstein, 1995). Pregnancy, par-ticularly the first, results in marked changes in phys-ical appearance that women have little experience of.Therefore, adjusting to these changes while maintain-ing the physical appearance they aspire to can be prob-lematic. For those who use social comparison to ref-erence and regulate their outward appearance (Fes-tinger, 1957; Wood, 1989; Tiggemann & McGill, 2004),a pregnant celebrity may be considered an “expert” inhow one should look in pregnancy to be socially ac-ceptable and/or admired. With the association of self-surveillance and consumerism well-established in theliterature (Hine, 2013), the wealth of media images ofpregnant celebrities available could well be a sourceof attraction to many women who have a high usualconcern for their physical appearance. This leads toHypothesis 2:
H2: Greater usual concern for physical appearanceincreases pregnant celebrity attraction.
Usual Concern for Physical Appearanceand Pregnancy Weight Worry
As the level of concern for physical appearance as asource of self-satisfaction and assurance of acceptancefrom others is an enduring characteristic of a person’spsyche (Netemeyer, Burton, & Lichtenstein, 1995), apriori, the usual attitudes and effort to which a womangoes to sustain a desired level of physical appearancewill continue to matter in pregnancy. Concern for phys-ical appearance can drive both healthy (e.g., healthyeating) and nonhealthy (e.g., tanning) behaviors in aneffort to maintain attractiveness (Hayes & Ross, 1987).A woman’s level of concern for appearance may influ-ence attitudes toward her changing body shape andweight gain as there is a substantial need for alterationin appearance products such as clothing (Longhurst,2005).
In pregnancy, a high level of concern for physicalappearance may be a motivator for media consumptionand vicarious learning from images of those thoughtto be attractive when pregnant (e.g., celebrities). An
762 KRISJANOUS, RICHARD, AND GAZLEYPsychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
intense degree in appearance interest could be an in-dication of a self-concern that may cause distortion toattitudes and behavior. For women who usually or rou-tinely possess a strong orientation to weight controlto maintain a physical appearance or a desire to alignwith a societal view on the ideal female shape, a situ-ation that takes control away (particularly situationsdirectly related to their gestating body) could be re-garded as threatening. This in turn may manifest itselfas a worry over the extent to which they are gainingweight in pregnancy. Within the context of celebrityattraction, as a pregnant woman’s personal concernfor physical appearance may increase the attraction topregnant celebrity image, the hypothesis is:
H3: Greater usual concern for physical appearanceincreases pregnancy weight worry.
Pregnancy Weight Worry and PregnancyBody Image Dissatisfaction
There is little empirical work on body image in preg-nancy, while the literature that does exist is conflict-ing. It is often assumed that the usual objectificationand commodification of feminine attractiveness doesnot extend to pregnant women (Earle, 2003). Alterna-tive research however suggests that pregnant womenare less dissatisfied with their bodies than nonpregnantwomen (Clark & Ogden, 1999). While it is generallybelieved that pregnancy allows the woman to step out-side the “tyranny of slimness,” Earle (2003) howeverargues the opposite may be true; that is, how a womanlooks during pregnancy is important to her. The con-cept of the “wayward” body has been applied to preg-nancy, with gestation likened to a specific body episodethat belies the modern Western conviction that one’sbody can be possessed and molded accordingly (War-ren & Brewis, 2004). Duncombe, Wertheim, Skouteris,Paxton, and Kelly (2008) studied pregnant women atdifferent stages of their pregnancy and found that re-spondents’ body image remained fairly stable acrosspregnancy such that women who started with greaterbody concerns maintained them overtime. Those withthe most body concerns reported more depressive symp-toms, tendency toward dieting, and smoking duringpregnancy, suggesting they were at greater risk interms of health and well-being during pregnancy. In-deed, some authors argue that pregnancy representsthe greatest deviation from a woman’s ideal body im-age and that as the pregnancy progresses, women be-come more negative about their appearance (Drake,Verhulst, Fawcett, & Barger, 1998; Strang & Sullivan,1985). Some may invest in a “body project” constitutedby the efforts to sculpt their bodies in culturally accept-able ways (Warren & Brewis, 2004).
Nonpregnant women who are affected by relianceon weight control to maintain a positive body imagecould be at risk for an assault on their image duringpregnancy due to the inevitable weight gain that comes
with pregnancy (Muller, 1994; Priel & Besser, 2001).Therefore, given the context of celebrity attraction (e.g.,celebrities positive pregnant image), for those with ahigh concern for the weight changes pregnancy brings,pregnancy weight worry and a pregnancy body imagedissatisfaction would be intrinsically linked. Hence,
H4: Greater pregnancy weight worry increases preg-nancy body image dissatisfaction.
Usual Concern for Physical Appearanceand Pregnancy Body Image Dissatisfaction
Pregnancy body image is defined as the extent to whichone enjoys their pregnant state and feels themselvesattractive (Devine, Bove, & Olson, 2000). It comprisedthe feelings and impressions a woman has of her physi-cal appearance during pregnancy and is in turn shapedby prepregnant self-image and beliefs about pregnancyand other people’s attitudes and responses toward heras a pregnant woman. A positive body image in preg-nancy can lead to increased enjoyment and coping andappears to have a positive influence and associationwith other aspects of health (Earle, 2003). If one thinksthey are attractive, psychosocial well-being is likely tobe enhanced (Johnson, Burrows, & Williamson, 2004;Strang & Sullivan, 1985). Body dissatisfaction is onefacet of body image relating to dissatisfaction with par-ticular aspects of the body (Thompson, Heinberg, Al-tabe, & Tantleff-Dunn, 1999). Pregnancy body imagedissatisfaction is thus defined as dissatisfaction withone or more physical changes wrought by the preg-nancy.
As previously discussed, the literature is conflictingregarding the extent to which the sexualized weight-constrained female norm of attractiveness extends topregnancy (Johnson, Burrows, & Williamson, 2004).Devine, Bove, and Olson (2000) contend that weightgain in pregnancy is distressing for some, but for othersliberating; some feel the loss of control is unpleasant,while for others it leads to great enjoyment, “causingthem to luxuriate in their materiality” (p. 202). Thisfeeling is advanced if the woman believes her gravidbody is changing to accommodate success at pregnancyand a new functionality, as opposed to mere orna-mentality (Duncombe et al., 2008; Skouteris, Carr,Wertheim, Paxton, & Duncombe, 2005). For womenwho have a high usual concern for their physicalappearance but do not feel particularly threatenedby their pregnancy weight gain, it is likely that theywill enjoy their developing pregnant body, and exhibita correspondingly positive pregnant body image.Therefore, given the potential influence of celebrityattraction on self-image and considering that usualconcern for physical appearance may increase theattraction of celebrity image, the hypothesis is:
H5: Greater usual concern for physical appearancedecreases pregnancy body image dissatisfaction.
THE PERFECT LITTLE BUMP 763Psychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
Usual Concern for Physical Appearanceand Prenatal Attachment
Lederman and Weiss (1996) and Smith (1999) discussthe possible selves that may emerge from pregnancyas a result of identity development during transitionto motherhood. This transition period can be disor-ganizing or a developmental opportunity to grow orregress. Rubin (1984), Mercer (2004), and Schumacherand Meleis (1994) present a picture of what the mark-ers of successful transition in pregnancy would com-prise. One important marker, prenatal attachment, isthe emotional attachment made up of feelings of af-filiation and affection by the mother to the developingbaby, which indicates positive acceptance and acknowl-edgment that the pregnancy is producing a person intheir own right (DePietro, 2003; Schumacher & Meleis,1994). Furthermore, a fully developed prenatal attach-ment signals that the mother will accept the newbornand provide care rather than disinterest and abandon-ment (DePietro, 2010).
As previously indicated, a usual concern forphysical appearance can drive both healthy andnonhealthy behaviors in an effort to maintain attrac-tiveness (Hayes & Ross, 1987). Working from the per-spective of self-determination theory, Sebire, Standage,and Vansteenkiste (2009) found that those in thegeneral population who were intrinsically motivateddemonstrated more positive cognitive, affective, andbehavioral outcomes than those driven by extrinsic ap-pearance concerns. For those women whose usual ap-pearance attention and effort is given to driving posi-tive and healthy outcomes, a sustained level of usualconcern for physical appearance would be a positiveinfluence over the establishment of positive prena-tal attachment, fostered by an overall feeling of self-determination and general well-being. Therefore, giventhe potential influence of celebrity attraction on prena-tal attachment and considering that concern for physi-cal appearance may increase the attraction of celebrityimage, the hypothesis is:
H6: Greater usual concern for physical appearancepositively influences prenatal attachment.
Pregnancy Body Image Dissatisfaction andPrenatal Attachment
A high level of prenatal attachment means that themother will consider the baby as a critically importantfactor, thereby striving for an ultimate intrauterine en-vironment and preparation for a safe birth. A low levelof attachment can lead to disregard for the nurturanceof the pregnancy and also signal potential problems inthe postnatal phase and an increased risk of postnataldepression (Priel & Besser, 2001).
Several factors may cause interruption in the estab-lishment of prenatal attachment. Commonly measuredcomponents of prenatal attachment include preoccupa-
tion with thoughts about the fetus, maternal interac-tion with the fetus (i.e., talking to or palpating theabdomen to elicit a fetal response), affective valenceof feelings toward either the fetus or the pregnancy,and the degree to which women report that they mod-ulate their behavior or diet to foster fetal well-being(DiPietro, 2010). The reported intensity of prenatal at-tachment usually increases with gestational age (Dam-ato, 2004; Lerum & LoBiondo-Wood, 1989; Reading,Cox, Sledmere, & Campbell, 1984; van Bussel, Spitz,& Demyttenaere, 2010). DiPietro (2010) reports thatattempts to link the strength of prenatal attachment tospecific maternal psychological or demographic char-acteristics have been generally unsuccessful with sig-nificant inconsistency in research findings (Cannella,2005; Van den Bergh & Simons, 2009). Nevertheless,it would appear reasonable to suggest that a poor bodyimage in pregnancy would disrupt the establishment ofprenatal attachment. Therefore, the final hypothesis is,given the context of celebrity attraction and self-image
H7: Greater pregnancy body image dissatisfactiondecreases prenatal attachment.
RESEARCH METHOD
The study formed part of a large New Zealand cross-sectional health psychographic study. The survey in-strument consisted of a self-completion paper-basedsurvey that examined various preexisting values, at-titudes, and lifestyle behaviors relevant to pregnancy.For women to be included in the study, they had to be(1) in their first pregnancy, (2) between 20 and 36 weeksgestation, and (3) over 16 years of age. Both high- andlow-risk pregnant women were included.
Distribution of the survey was two-stage. First,maternity health care professionals (obstetricians,midwives, antenatal education coordinators) weresought to assist in the distribution process. Healthprofessionals were approached through several meth-ods. Potential maternity hospitals and midwifery andmedical practices were drawn from researcher net-works, Web sites, and contact lists made available forpregnant women. In the first instance, approach wasusually through a phone call to the practice manager,or for smaller practices, one of the practice healthprofessionals. In successful approaches a meeting for alater date was arranged, with one or more researchersattending to explain the study and the nature ofassistance required. Once agreement had been gained(successful in all cases where a meeting was attended),packages were delivered to the practices. The numberof packages allocated was based on an approximationof how many woman within the inclusion criteriawould be attending the practice in the next six or somonths. Health professionals’ assistance consisted ofoffering the questionnaire package to women in theircare who met the inclusion criteria during a routine
764 KRISJANOUS, RICHARD, AND GAZLEYPsychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
visit or appointment. In order to facilitate this processand ensure that women received the same instructions,a letter to each practice with suggested scripting wasincluded in the initial delivery. For public hospitals,a similar process was conducted once access throughthe respective hospital research committees had beenachieved. Hospital participation provided access toboth high- and low-risk women. Canvassing of prac-tices and hospitals was discontinued once a nationalspread and sufficient number of health professionalswere involved that would mean the desired numberof questionnaires could be distributed. This processworked well overall. Feedback from participatingpractices and hospitals was that the time and effort re-quired could be accommodated easily within a routinevisit between the health professional and client.
Each respondent questionnaire package for poten-tial respondents contained an information sheet, ques-tionnaire, consent form for signing, incentive (pen), andpostage paid return envelope. Following an approachfrom their health professional, and if agreeable, thewoman took the pack away, completed the survey andreturned it via the post to the researcher in the stampedaddressed envelope provided. This method meant thatthe woman felt under no pressure from the health careprovider to participate and the provider was also min-imally involved in the distribution, so as not to findthe task arduous. However, this did mean a poten-tial problem that respondents could not get clarificationon instructions from the researcher (Leeuw, 2008), re-searcher control over final distribution was given over,and length and extra process to the response chain wasadded. Respondent follow-up letters were included inthe original drop off packages to providers. These let-ters were to be given to women who had taken a ques-tionnaire away at a previous date. As the respondentwas in regular contact with their provider, it was sug-gested the reminder letter be given to the client at theirnext visit, after at least a two-week interval.
Gaining the assistance of health professionals to dis-tribute questionnaires significantly improved gather-ing a representative sample of pregnant women, sincealmost all women engage a health provider by the 12th-week of pregnancy. A total of 1205 questionnaire pack-ages were distributed to health providers. In order toobtain the distribution numbers desired, the processtook approximately eight months.
Wherever possible, existing scales were used to mea-sure constructs. The existing scales were modified to re-flect the pregnancy in New Zealand context. These weresourced from a range of disciplines, including market-ing, psychology, medicine, and nursing. All scales used7-point Likert-type responses. The items used to mea-sure each construct are detailed below (please see Ap-pendix for the full list of items).
Usual Concern for Physical Appearance
This scale measures the concern that respondents havefor their physical appearance when not pregnant. It was
derived from the Vanity scale (Cronbach’s α = 0.91) de-veloped by Netemeyer, Burton, and Lichenstein (1995)in consumer behavior. Three items measure the impor-tance and effort respondents place on appearance andthe perceptions of others.
Pregnant Celebrity Attraction
Pregnant celebrity attraction is defined as the re-spondent’s level of interest in pregnant celebrities’lives and the extent to which the respondent feels thecelebrity interest influences the respondent’s behavioror goals for pregnancy lifestyle. Given that there isno existing scale suitable to measure this construct,the Celebrity Attitude Scale, from the psychologyliterature, was adapted to fit a pregnancy context (Mc-Cutcheon, Lange, & Houran, 2002). The three itemsused measure the extent to which pregnant celebritiesmay inform or influence respondents’ behavior duringtheir own pregnancy.
Pregnancy Weight Worry
The pregnancy weight worry scale measured attitudestoward respondents’ weight gain in pregnancy and howtheir weight gain makes them feel in relation to howthey look. This means that measurement of weight gainis in relation to physical appearance, as opposed to at-titudes toward gaining weight to meet the nutritionalneeds of pregnancy. There was no suitable existingscale. However, the work of DiPietro, Millet, Costigan,Gurewitsch, and Caulfield (2003) was particularly rel-evant in developing a new scale. Four items made upthe pregnancy weight worry scale.
Pregnancy Body Image Dissatisfaction
Pregnancy body image dissatisfaction was measuredusing an adapted version of DiPietro et al.’s (2003) scaleon attitudes to pregnancy and weight gain. Three itemswere used, measuring respondents’ level of dissatisfac-tion with changes and appearance of their gravid body.As items were framed positively, a lower item scorewould indicate a higher level of pregnancy body imagedissatisfaction.
Prenatal Attachment
Prenatal attachment was operationalized with aslightly modified version of Muller’s (1994) “prenatal at-tachment inventory” (Cronbach’s α = 0.81). Five itemswere used which measure the extent to which the re-spondent is excited by, anticipates, and enjoys the pro-cess of being pregnant and the changes happening toher body.
DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
A total of 468 usable responses were received repre-senting a 39.9% response rate. As it was not possible to
THE PERFECT LITTLE BUMP 765Psychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
Table 1. Demographic Data.
Age Ethnicity
16–19 7.7% NZ European 64.4%20–24 14.6% British/other European 10.5%25–29 23.2% Polynesian/Maori 13.6%30–34 36.8% Asian/other 11.5%35–39 15.3%40+ 2.3%
EducationCollege (high school) 30.7%Trade certificate or undergraduate diploma 23.5%Bachelor degree or above 45.8%
Table 2. Media Use Data.
Media Use Mean SD
Television 5.90 1.21Internet 5.39 1.73Cinema 3.91 1.36Women’s magazine 3.87 1.65
estimate the number of questionnaires that were lostthrough attrition (e.g., providers losing questionnairepackages, and failing to return unused questionnaires),the response rate may well have been higher. The datacollected exhibited a normal distribution with regardsto skewness and kurtosis (Kline, 2005). Demographicdata for the sample is shown in Table 1.
The sample is considered well-educated comparedwith the New Zealand average (Statistics New Zealand,2010), but similar in all other demographic dimensionsmeasured. Means for respondent media use (Likertscales 1 = low, 7 = high) are shown in Table 2. It isevident that television (mean = 5.90; SD = 1.21) is theprimary source of media consumed.
AMOS software version 6 was used to conduct thestructural equation modeling, including confirmatoryfactor analysis (CFA) to determine convergent anddiscriminant validity (Cavana, Delahaye, & Sekaran,2001; Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1995; Kline,2005). Following validation of the measurement model,the model was tested as a structural equation model(Byrne, 2001).
Measurement Model
An initial factor analysis was conducted for validityand reliability. Five items did not exhibit acceptablefactor loadings (<0.60) and/or did not meet minimumcommunality levels (>0.50). Each of the five items wasreviewed with respect to theoretical basis and contextof their respective construct (e.g., convergent validity)and was subsequently deleted from the measurementmodel (see Table 3; Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). Allitems measuring the five constructs in the model showacceptable convergent validity (loadings > 0.58) andinternal consistency, with construct reliability valuesranging from 0.71 to 0.85 (Nunnally, 1967).
Discriminant validity was demonstrated by compar-ing the square root of the average variance extracted(AVE) with the corresponding correlations using theAVE method suggested by Fornell and Larcker (1981).The results in Table 4 indicate acceptable discrimi-nant validity for each construct in this study. The finaloverall measurement model fit indices achieved accept-able levels, root mean square error of approximation(RMSEA) = 0.056, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.97,normed fit index (NFI) = 0.94, and the structural modelwas then used to test the research hypotheses.
Structural Model (Hypotheses Testing)
Although the χ2 was significant (χ2 = 139.5, df = 58,p < 0.001), this is not unusual due to its sensitivity tosample size, and other goodness-of-fit criteria are gen-erally used to evaluate and interpret structural equa-tion models (Bagozzi & Yi, 2012). The structural model,see Figure 2, showed acceptable goodness-of-fit mea-sures, RMSEA = 0.055, standardized root mean squareresidual (SRMR) = 0.041, CFI = 0.97, NFI = 0.94, chi-square divided by its degrees of freedom (CMIN/DF) =2.41 (Browne & Cudeck, 2003).
All hypotheses were significant. Both pregnantcelebrity attraction (β = 0.217, p = 0.003) and usual con-cern for physical appearance (β = 0.270, p < 0.001) sig-nificantly and positively influences pregnancy weightworry, accounting for 16.6% of the variance in preg-nancy weight worry (supporting H1 and H3). This re-sult indicates that the greater the attraction towardpregnant celebrity’s image the greater the pregnantwomen’s weight gain concern. Similarly, the greatera women’s concern for her physical appearance, thegreater the pregnant women’s weight gain concern.
Pregnancy weight worry significantly influencespregnancy body image dissatisfaction (β = 0.488, p <
0.001), supporting H4, and indicates that weight gainedduring pregnancy may have a negative effect on bodyimage. Pregnancy body image dissatisfaction signifi-cantly and negatively influences prenatal attachment(β = −0.666, p < 0.001), supporting H7.
The positive significant relationship found betweenusual concern for physical appearance and pregnantcelebrity attraction (β = 0.394, p < 0.001) accounts for15.5% of the variance in pregnant celebrity attraction,supporting H2. This finding supports the notion thatthose with a high concern for appearance are attractedto pregnant celebrities for inspiration or social compari-son. In addition, the results support hypotheses H5 andH6 that positive usual concern for physical appearancehas a negative impact on pregnancy body image dissat-isfaction (β = −0.173, p = 0.003) and a positive influ-ence on prenatal attachment (β = 0.100, p = 0.032). Thisimplies that concern for physical appearance in preg-nancy has a small but positive direct effect on prenatalattachment outside of the weight worry and pregnancybody image dissatisfaction route.
To investigate the model results, more fully boot-strapping (resampling n = 2000 with replacement,
766 KRISJANOUS, RICHARD, AND GAZLEYPsychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
Table 3. Convergent Validity, Average Variance Extracted, and Construct Reliability.
Original and Final-Scale Items
PregnancyBody ImageDissatisfac-
tion
PregnantCelebrityAttraction
PrenatalAttach-ment
UsualConcern for
PhysicalAppearance
PregnancyWeightWorry
Source AdaptedFrom
I feel happy about the changesmy body is going through
0.890 DiPietro et al.(2003)
I am proud of looking pregnant 0.764I can look good in pregnancy 0.708
Seeing celebrities lose weightquickly after pregnancy is aninspiration for me
0.895 NEW scaleMcCutcheon,Lange, and Houran(2002)
I like to copy what pregnantcelebrities/stars wear inpregnancy
0.577
I like seeing or reading whatpregnant celebrities aredoing∗
–
I am excited about becoming amother
0.810 Muller (1994)
I look forward to each new stageof the pregnancy
0.785
I feel attached to my baby 0.629I feel that my body is achieving
something extraordinary∗∗–
I enjoy feeling my baby move∗∗ –
The way I look is extremelyimportant to me
0.821 Netemeyer,Burton, andLichtenstein (1995)
Looking my best is worth theeffort
0.798
I would be embarrassed if Iwere around people and didnot look my best
0.794
I feel as if my body is out ofcontrol∗
– NEW scaleDiPietro et al.(2003)
I am embarrassed whenever Iam weighed∗
–
I worry that I might look fatduring this pregnancy
0.856
I will be anxious to get back intoshape after the pregnancy
0.659
Variance extracted 0.626 0.567 0.556 0.647 0.584
Construct reliability 0.832 0.714 0.788 0.846 0.734∗Items deleted from final scale due to low communalities.∗∗Items deleted from final scale due to low factor loading.
α = 0.05) was conducted to determine total and in-direct effects (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). The resultsof the bootstrap showed that pregnant celebrity at-traction had a significant indirect effect on pregnancybody image dissatisfaction (β = 0.106, p = 0.002). Preg-nant celebrity attraction also had a significant nega-tive indirect effect on prenatal attachment (β = −0.070,p = 0.002). This supports the study’s overall thesis thatpregnant celebrity image influences pregnancy weightworry and body image dissatisfaction and indirectly in-hibits prenatal attachment.
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
This study has shown that a significant relationshipexists between a pregnant woman’s attraction to preg-nant celebrities and ultimately the potential disruptionin the establishment of prenatal attachment. Althoughthere are several other factors that influence prena-tal attachment, such as pregnancy intendedness andquality of social support, the antecedent variables mea-sured in this study make a significant contribution ac-counting for a large proportion of the variance found in
THE PERFECT LITTLE BUMP 767Psychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
Table 4. Discriminant Validity.
Pregnancy BodyImage
DissatisfactionPregnant Celebrity
AttractionPrenatal
Attachment
Usual Concern forPhysical
AppearancePregnancy Weight
Worry
AVE 0.626 0.567 0.556 0.647 0.584Pregnancy body image
dissatisfaction0.791
Pregnant celebrityattraction
0.038 0.753
Prenatal attachment 0.670 0.049 0.746Usual concern for
physical appearance0.003 0.391 0.094 0.804
Pregnancy weightworry
0.441 0.334 −0.222 0.355 0.764
Square root of AVEs in the diagonals.All correlations are less than the corresponding square root of the AVEs.Implied correlations for each construct in the model in the lower half of the table.
The finding that pregnant women, who are inter-ested and involved with the life of pregnant celebritiesthrough the media, have an increased chance of weightgain worry in pregnancy supports and extends theexisting celebrity influence in nonpregnant consumertheory (Gulas & McKeage, 2000; Hirschman & Thomp-son, 1997; Richins, 1991, 1995). Specifically, this studyextends the nonpregnant celebrity-to-consumer weightinfluence notion by finding validity for it in the preg-nancy context and that in fact pregnant women are notnecessarily immune or protected from the “tyranny ofthinness” as suggested by Clark and Ogden (1999) andDevine, Bove, and Olson (2000). Reported media usageby respondents shows high usage of the Internet andtelevision, with a moderate use of women’s magazines.For some women, the increased ability of the popularpress to distribute ill-informed pregnancy informationthrough celebrities may be problematic as the informa-
tion may be exposed and inspired by images and writteninformation that are neither healthy, true, nor achiev-able for them. The significant relationships of usualconcern for physical appearance, both directly to preg-nant celebrity attraction and as an antecedent itself topregnancy weight worry further demonstrates how awoman’s pursuit of personal physical appearance goalsin pregnancy may well cause her to refer to pregnantcelebrities as potential powerful sources of socializationand comparison. Arguably media and marketing effortsthat promote or focus on pregnant celebrities’ activitiesin regard to unhealthy or unrealistic control over thepregnant body may play an important part in fosteringpoorer outcomes for both mother and baby.
The influence of usual concern for physical ap-pearance in pregnancy can be positive and productivetoward body image, if the concern of physical ap-pearance does not lead to apprehension about weightgain. For women who usually or routinely take ahigh level of interest in their appearance (driven
768 KRISJANOUS, RICHARD, AND GAZLEYPsychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
by health-promoting and intrinsic motivations), acontinued sustained interest through pregnancy mayenhance how they regard their pregnant shape andappearance. For those women, pregnancy providesanother opportunity to enjoy new ways of attend-ing to the self, with pregnancy-specific products,such as clothing, and personal beauty products pro-viding numerous opportunities for the maternitymarket.
The significant relationship between weight and dis-satisfaction with body image in pregnancy is an impor-tant finding since body image discontent or frustrationis not a healthy adaption to pregnancy and may fosterresponses that encourage unhealthy physical health at-titudes and behaviors (Earle, 2003). The relationshipmay also act as an assault to other facets of psycho-logical well-being, such as satisfaction with primaryrelationships (Dejin-Karlson & Ostergren, 2003; Feld-man, Dunkel-Schetter, Sandman, & Wadhaw, 2000).Negotiating the world of weight gain in pregnancy canbe a difficult one. For many women experiencing theirfirst pregnancy, and possibly subsequent pregnancies,readily available and reliable knowledge of what makesup a healthy weight gain in pregnancy may be scant.Mathieu (2009) states that some women are pleasantlysurprised to find out that much of their weight is due tothe baby’s own weight and not just maternal fat. WithWestern society’s emphasis on avoiding obesity and los-ing weight it may seem strange to women that gainingweight in this life stage is medically normal and partof a healthy pregnancy development. For those with ahistory of perpetual dieting and avoidance of nonpreg-nant weight gain, they may well resist any relaxationof this attitude around pregnancy. Furthermore, thepast three or so decades have seen increasing empha-sis on foods to avoid in pregnancy because of the risk ofcontamination or fear of sensitivity formation in the de-veloping baby (Dean et al., 2007; Delgado, 2008; Ross,Jones, & Lynch, 2006). With increased time pressures,the popularity of eating out, making “safe” food choicesmay mean it is easier to avoid fresh or more wholesomefoods for the fear or contamination from agents such aslisteriosis. By doing this, pregnant women opt for safetyas a primary motivation in dietary choices as opposed todecisions based on healthy nutrition that would fostera weight gain within a recommended range. Even if theincidence of “pregorexia” in pregnant women is over-rated and more a media invention as Mathieu (2009)suggests, one needs to be alert to how media-fosteredconsumer attitudes and ideas can develop into palpabletrends and patterns.
This study has also demonstrated that pregnancybody image dissatisfaction leads to a reduction in pre-natal attachment. With the extant literature show-ing inconsistencies in findings related to body imageand prenatal attachment (DiPietro, 2010), this find-ing adds support to the notion that this relationshipexists. Importantly the results demonstrate that preg-nant celebrity exposure in the media has the ability toindirectly impact on critical maternal adaptation out-
comes, pregnant body dissatisfaction, and reduced pre-natal attachment. Prenatal attachment is a powerfulcatalyst for ensuring that the developing baby is heldin high regard by the mother and that she nurturesand protects the environment in which the baby is crit-ically dependent (Mercer, 2004; Schumacher & Meleis,1994). Indeed pregnancy is a unique human state inthat there are two individuals completely linked to theattitudes, decisions, and behaviors of one. By identify-ing the path through which media audience scrutinyof celebrity pregnancy lifestyles may play a part inmaternal–fetal disturbance, an important contributionhas been made.
These findings have several implications that fallinto two major areas. First, the ways in which pregnantcelebrities are used in the media is discussed. Second,suggestions on how marketers and health profession-als could reduce negative celebrity influence in the twogroups are considered most vulnerable. The two groupsinclude those who are intensely affected by celebrityexposure, and demographic groups known to be moreinterested in celebrity lifestyle as a means of guidingtheir own behaviors.
For the first set of implications, the following rec-ommendations are made. Media such as Web sites thatpromote healthy eating need to consider the benefitsand ethics of including pages on celebrity pregnan-cies or “bump watching.” Topics such as “looking greatin pregnancy” and “getting your figure back fast afterbaby” carry messages that conflict with sound profes-sional advice that is in the best interests of audiencewell-being. In addition, the language used can be pow-erful in conveying meaning. For instance “the perfectlittle bump” is not necessarily a valid way to describehow a pregnant woman might feel about her abdominalgirth near full-term, however resilient her body imagemight be. Recently, there has been increased attentionon airbrushing and manipulation through photoshoptechnology of models in the media in general (Reaves,Bush, Hitchon, Park, & Yun, 2004; Sheldon, 2010). Mis-leading enough in nonpregnancy contexts, the use ofphotoshop material carries even more serious potentialconsequences for pregnant women and their developingbaby.
It would be presumptuous however to considercelebrity pregnancy media focus as only negative anddamaging, casting off the use of pregnant celebrity en-dorsements or media stories of their pregnancies ashaving no real utility or value. The use of celebritiesas positive role models could have significant utility inareas such as social marketing campaigns to reduceadolescent pregnancy. This is one area where other re-search aimed at theoretical development on the use ofpregnant celebrities in marketing and health promo-tion would be welcome.
In regard to the second recommendation area, prac-titioners (media, social marketing, and health) needto be cognizant of the risks within their audienceof “celebrity worship” and an overly keen attractionto celebrities as a source of pregnancy information.
THE PERFECT LITTLE BUMP 769Psychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
For health professionals, who engage one-to-one withclients, candid and open discussions about the mediaand what it portrays can be a valuable part of an an-tenatal education program or platform through whichto approach conversations about pregnancy nutrition,exercise, and body image, and discuss what is realis-tic and in the best interests of the maternal–fetal unit.This type of approach should be extended to womenin the prepregnancy age range also, so that they arewell-informed before the onset of conception, by whichstage some attitudes might have been formed by moreseductive forms of media.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCHAREAS
Some limitations to the study are acknowledged. Whilethis research has established the passage through preg-nant celebrity attraction to pregnancy body image dis-satisfaction and ultimately prenatal attachment, it hasnot focused on clarifying exactly the preexisting con-sumer characteristics or contexts that increase preg-nant celebrity attraction and reaction. .Stever (2011)notes that more conceptual work is needed to differen-tiate between a celebrity fan and a celebrity worship-per, or those who are overly absorbed or addicted totheir interest in a celebrity. Identification and contin-ued research focused on those with the highest levelof celebrity attraction, or who meet the criteria of acelebrity worshiper as defined by Stever (2011) withina pregnancy context would offer much, particularlywhere more antecedent variables are included. An in-creased understanding of this phenomenon would en-able health professionals to better educate and monitorthose women who are at risk for unrealistic social com-parison as a result of exposure to pregnant celebrities.Furthermore, a longitudinal focus would increase thetheoretical contribution as to whether celebrity attrac-tion is maintained by the same women and at the samelevel postpartum, where celebrities may be referencedfor postnatal weight loss guidance or even parentingstyle. A study that uses a qualitative approach wouldalso add a richness and explanatory depth to findings.Lastly, the addition of actual clinical data from respon-dents would add another level of value and rigor in anyfuture study.
CONCLUSION
The media and maternity marketing practitioners areincreasingly enamored by pregnant celebrities and thescrutiny of their private lives and physical appearancein pregnancy. This will no doubt continue to be an ex-tremely profitable tool for the maternity business in thefuture. For those pregnant consumers who find celebri-ties aspirational, adopting attitudes and behaviors thatbring themselves closer to what they perceive as ideal
can lead to a trajectory that is ultimately not in the bestinterests of themselves or their baby. By detailing thiscomplex relationship, this study makes a valuable con-tribution to the academic literature on the mechanismof celebrity attraction in the context of pregnancy, forboth marketing and health.
REFERENCES
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equationmodeling in practice: A review and recommended two-stepapproach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.
Ashdown-Lambert, J. R. (2005). A review of low birth weight:Predictors, precursors and morbidity outcomes. Journal ofthe Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, 125, 76–83.
Ashe, D. D., & McCutcheon, L. (2001). Shyness, lonelinessand attitude toward celebrities. Current Research in SocialPsychology, 6, 124–33.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (2012). Specification, evaluation, andinterpretation of structural equation models. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science, 40, 8–34.
Baker, S., Gentry, J., & Rittenburg, T. (2005). Building under-standing of the domain of consumer vulnerability. Journalof Macromarketing, 25, 128–139.
Barker, D. J., & Clark, P. M. (1997). Fetal undernutritionand disease in later life. Reviews of Reproduction, 2,105–112.
Brown, W. J., Basil, M. D., & Bocarnea, M. C. (2003). Socialinfluence of an international celebrity: Responses to thedeath of Princess Diana. Journal of Communication, 53,587–605.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of as-sessing model fit. In Bollen, K. A. & Long, J. S. (Eds.),Testing structural equation models (Vol. 154, pp. 136–162).London, England: Sage Publications.
Burton, S., Netemeyer, R. G., & Lichtenstein, D. R. (1995).Gender differences for appearance-related attitudes andbehaviors: Implications for consumer welfare. Journal ofPublic Policy & Marketing, 14, 60–75.
Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling withAMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cannella, B. L. (2005). Maternal–fetal attachment: Anintegrative review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 50,60–68.
Cavana, R. Y., Delahaye, B., & Sekaran, U. (2001). Appliedbusiness research: Qualitative and quantitative methods.Milton, QLD: John Wiley and Sons.
Choi, S. M., Lee, W., & Kim, H. (2005). Lessons from the richand famous: A cross-cultural comparison of celebrity en-dorsement in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 34, 85–98.
Chomitz, V., Cheung, L. W. Y., & Lieberman, E. (1995). Therole of lifestyle in preventing low birth weight. Future ofChildren, 5, 121–138.
Cismaru, M., Lavack, A. M., & Markewich, E. (2009). Socialmarketing campaigns aimed at preventing drunk driving.International Marketing Review, 26, 292–311.
Clark, M., & Ogden, J. (1999). The impact of pregnancy on eat-ing behaviour and aspects of weight concern. InternationalJournal of Obesity, 23, 18–24.
Cunningham, H. (2002). Prodigal bodies: Pop culture and post-pregnancy. Michigan Quarterly Review, 41, 428–454.
770 KRISJANOUS, RICHARD, AND GAZLEYPsychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
Damato, E. G. (2004). Predictors of prenatal attachment inmothers of twins. Journal of Obstetrics and GynecologicalNeonatal Nursing, 33, 436–445.
Davies, A., Dobscha, S., Geiger, S., O’Donohue, S., O’Malley,L., Prothero, A., et al. (2010). Motherhood, marketization,and consumer vulnerability: Voicing international con-sumer experiences. Journal of Macromarketing, 30, 384–395.
De Boo, H. A., & Harding, J. E. (2006). The developmentalorigins of adult disease (Barker) hypothesis. Australian andNew Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 46, 4–14.
Dean, T., Venter, C., Pereira, B., Grundy, J. T., Clayton, C. B.,& Higgins, B. (2007). Government advice on peanut avoid-ance during pregnancy, is it followed correctly and what isthe impact on sensitization? Journal of Human Nutritionand Dietetics, 20, 95–99.
DeBar, L. L., Stadler, D., White, M., Schneider, M., Ford, E.,& Hernandez, A. (2009). Social marketing-based communi-cations to integrate and support the HEALTHY study in-tervention. International Journal of Obesity, 33, S52–S59.
Dejin-Karlson, E., & Ostergren, P. (2003). Psychosocial fac-tors, lifestyle, and fetal growth: The added value of bothpre- and post-natal assessments. European Journal of Pub-lic Health, 13, 210–217.
Delgado, A. (2008). Listeriosis in pregnancy. Journal of Mid-wifery and Women’s Health, 53, 255–259.
Devine, C. M., Bove, C. F., & Olson, O. (2000). Continuityand change in women’s weight orientations and lifestylepractices through pregnancy and the postpartum period:The influence of life course trajectories and transitionalevents. Social Science and Medicine, 50, 567–582.
DiPietro, J. A. (2010). Psychological and psychophysiologicalconsiderations regarding the maternal-fetal relationship.Infant and Child Development, 19, 27–38
DiPietro, J. A., Millet, S., Costigan, K. A., Gurewitsch, E., &Caulfield, L. E. (2003). Psychosocial influences on weightgain attitudes and behaviors during pregnancy. Journal ofAmerican Dietetic Association, 103, 1314–1319.
Dittmar, H., Halliwell, E., & Stirling, E. (2009). Understand-ing the impact of thin media models on women’s body-focused affect: The roles of thin-ideal internalization andweight-related self-discrepancy activation in experimentalexposure effects. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology,28, 43–72.
Drake, M.L., Verhulst, D., Fawcett, J., & Barger, D. F. (1998).Spouses’ body image changes during and after pregnancy:A replication in Canada. Journal of Nursing Scholarship,20, 88–92.
Duckworth, L. (2001), Women over 30 opting for caesareanbirths. The Independent, 13 April, 12 p.
Duncombe, D., Wertheim, E. H., Skouteris, H., Paxton, S. J.,& Kelly, L. (2008). How well do women adapt to changes intheir body size and shape across the course of pregnancy?Journal of Health Psychology, 13, 503-15.
Dutta-Bergman, M. J. (2006). A formative approach to strate-gic message targeting through soap operas: Using selectiveprocessing theories. Health Communication, 19, 11–18.
Earle, S. (2003). “Bumps and Boobs”: Fatness and women’sexperiences of pregnancy. Women’s Studies InternationalForum, 26, 245–252.
Feinmann, J. (2002). How to limit caesareans on demand: TooNICE to push? Lancet, 359, 774.
Feldman, P. J., Dunkel-Schetter, C., Sandman, C. A., & Wad-hwa, P. D. (2000) Maternal social support predicts birth
weight and fetal growth in human pregnancy. Psychoso-matic Medicine, 62, 715–725.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stan-ford: Stanford University Press.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation mod-els with unobservable variables and measurement error:Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18,382–388.
Fowles, E. R., & Feucht J. (2004). Testing the barriers forhealthy eating scale. Western Journal of Nursing Research,26, 429–443.
Gentile, K. (2011). What about the baby? The new cult of do-mesticity and media images of pregnancy. Studies in Gen-der and Sexuality, 12, 38–58.
Giles, D. C. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the lit-erature and a model for future research. Media Psychology,4, 279–302.
Giles, D. C. (2003). Media psychology. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum Associates.
Goodwin, S., & Huppatz, C. (Ed). (2010). The good mother:Contemporary motherhoods in Australia. Sydney: SydneyUniversity Press.
Gow, R. W., Lydecker, J. A., Lamanna, J. D., & Mazzeo, S.E. (2012). Representations of celebrities’ weight and shapeduring pregnancy and postpartum: A content analysis ofthree entertainment magazine websites. Body Image, 9,172–175.
Green-Raleigh, K., Lawrence, J. M., Chen, H., Devine, O., &Prue, C. (2005). Pregnancy planning status and health be-haviours among non-pregnant women in a California man-aged health care organization. Perspectives on Sexual andReproductive Health, 37, 179–183.
Gulas, C. S., & McKeage, K. (2000). Extending social compar-ison: An examination of the unintended consequences ofidealized advertising imagery. Journal of Advertising, 29,17–28.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C.(1995). Multivariate data analysis: With readings. UpperSaddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hayes, D., & Ross, C. E. (1987) Concern with appearance,health beliefs and eating habits. Journal of Health and So-cial Behavior, 28, 120–130.
Hine, G. (2013). The changing shape of pregnancy in NewZealand women’s magazines 1970–2008. Feminist MediaStudies, 13, 575–592.
Hirschman, E. C., & Thompson, C. J. (1997). Why media mat-ter: Toward a richer understanding of consumers’ relation-ships with advertising and mass media. Journal of Adver-tising, 26, 43–60.
Johnson, S., Burrows, A., & Williamson, I. (2004). Does mybump look big in this? The meaning of bodily changes forfirst-time mothers-to-be. Journal of Health Psychology, 9,361–374.
Keel, A., & Nataraajan, R. (2012). Celebrity endorsements andbeyond: New avenues for celebrity branding. Psychology &Marketing, 29, 690–703.
Klein, M. C. (2004). Quick fix culture: The cesarean section ondemand debate. Birth, 31, 161–164.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structuralequation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: The GuilfordPress.
Kohut, A. (2000). The risks and rewards of celebrity tragedycoverage. Columbia Journalism Review, 39, 64–64.
Laurence, J. (2001). Natural birth in decline as 1 in 5 hascaesarean. The Independent, 26 October, 10 p.
THE PERFECT LITTLE BUMP 771Psychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
Lederman, R., & Weiss, K. (1996). Psychosocial adaptation inpregnancy: Assessment of seven dimensions of maternaldevelopment. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Co.
Lee, A. S. M., & Kirkman, M. (2008). Disciplinary discourses:Rates of cesarean section explained by medicine, midwifery,and feminism. Health Care for Women International, 29,448–467.
Lerum, C. W., & LoBiondo-Wood, G. (1989). The relationship ofmaternal age, quickening, and physical symptoms of preg-nancy to the development of maternal-fetal attachment.Birth 16, 13–17.
Livingstone, S. (1998). Making sense of television: The psy-chology of audience interpretation (2nd ed.). London: Rout-ledge.
Longhurst, R. (2005). (Ad)dressing pregnant bodies in NewZealand: Clothing, fashion, subjectivities and spatialities.Gender, Place and Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geogra-phy, 12, 433–446.
Maltby, J., Giles, D. C., Barber, L., & McCutcheon, L. E. (2005).Intense-personal celebrity worship and body image: Evi-dence of a link among female adolescents. British Journalof Health Psychology, 10, 17–32.
Martin, N. (2001). Caesarean celebrities who are too posh topush. The Daily Telegraph, May 22, 1 p.
Mathieu, J. (2009). What is pregorexia? Journal of the Ameri-can Dietetic Association, 109, 976–979.
McCombs, M. E., Lange, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1993). Theevolution of agenda-setting research: Twenty-five years inthe marketplace of ideas. Journal of Communication, 43,58–67.
McCracken, G. (1989). Who is the celebrity endorser? Cul-tural foundations of the endorsement process. Journal ofConsumer Research, 16, 310–321.
McCutcheon, L. E., Lange, R., & Houran, J. (2002) Concep-tualization and measurement of celebrity worship. BritishJournal of Psychology, 93, 67–87.
Mercer, R. T. (2004). Becoming a mother versus maternal roleattainment. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 36, 226–232.
Muller, M. E. (1994). A questionnaire to measure mother-to-infant attachment. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 2,129–141.
Netemeyer, R. G., Burton, S., & Lichtenstein, D. R. (1995)Trait aspects of vanity: Measurement and relevance to con-sumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 612–626.
Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York, NY:McGraw-Hill.
O’Reilly, N. J., & Braedley, L. A. (2008). Celebrity athletes andathletic clothing design: Branding female tennis players.International Journal of Sport Management and Market-ing, 3, 119–139.
Ohanian, R. (1991). The impact of celebrity spokespersons’perceived image on consumers’ intention to purchase. Jour-nal of Advertising Research, 31, 46–54.
Patterson, M, & O’Malley, L. (2006). Bouncing back: Empha-sized femininity and pregnant embodiment. In researchingmotherhood: Experience, empowerment and embodiment,Special Session, 8th ACR Conference on Gender, Marketingand Consumer Behaviour, Edinburgh, 29 June–1 July.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resam-pling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effectsin multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods,40, 3, 879–891.
Priel, B., & Besser, A. (2001). Bridging the gap between attach-ment and object relations theories: A study of the transition
to motherhood. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 74,85–100.
Rayner, M. (2007), Social marketing: How might this con-tribute to tackling obesity?. Obesity Reviews, 8, 195–199.
Reading, A. E., Cox, D. N., Sledmore, C. M., & Campbell, S.(1984). Psychological changes over the course of pregnancy:A study of attitudes toward the fetus/neonate. Health Psy-chology, 3, 211–221.
Reaves, S., Bush, J., Hitchon, C., Park, S., & Yun, G. (2004).You can never be too thin—or can you? The effects of digitalmanipulation of fashion models’ body size, leg length andskin color. Race, Gender, and Class, 11, 140–155.
Rein, I., Kottler, P., & Stoller, M. (1987). High visibility. NewYork: Dodd, Mead & Company.
Revington, M. (2004, November). Secrets of the womb. NewZealand Listener, pp. 20–26.
Richins, M. L. (1991). Social comparison and the idealized im-ages of advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 71–83.
Richins M. L. (1995). Social comparison, advertising, and con-sumer discontent. American Behavioral Scientist, 38, 593–607.
Ross, D. S., Jones, J. L., & Lynch, M. F. (2006). Toxoplasmosis,cytomegalovirus, listeriosis and preconception care. Mater-nal and Child Health Journal, 10, 189–193.
Roth, H., Homer C., & Fenwick, J. (2012). Bouncing back:How Australia’s leading women’s magazines portray thepostpartum “body.” Women and birth: Journal of the Aus-tralian College of Midwives, 25, 128–134.
Royal College of Midwives (RCOM). (2010). The RCMand Netmums’ survey—A growing problem: Ma-ternal obesity. Retrieved June 10, 2013, fromhttp://www.rcm.org.uk/college/about/media-centre/press-releases/a-uk-wide-survey-of-6226-mothers-experiences-of-maternal-obesity-issues-by-netmums-and-the-rcm-15-11-2010/?locale=en.
Rubin, R. (1984). Maternal identity and the maternal experi-ence. New York, NY: Springer.
Schaninger, C. M., & Danko, W. D. (1993). A conceptual andempirical comparison of alternative housing lifestyle cyclemodels. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 580–594.
Schumacher, K. L., & Meleis, A. I. (1994). Transitions: A cen-tral concept in nursing. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 26,119–127.
Sebire, S. J., Standage M., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2009). Exam-ining intrinsic versus extrinsic exercise goals: Cognitive,affective, and behavioral outcomes. Journal of Sport andExercise Psychology, 31, 189–210.
Sha, J., & Kirkman, M. (2009). Shaping pregnancy: Represen-tations of pregnant women in Australian women’s maga-zines. Australian Feminist Studies, 24, 359–371.
Sheldon, P. (2010). Pressure to be perfect: Influences on collegestudents’ body esteem. Southern Communication Journal,75, 277–298.
Skouteris, H., Carr, R., Wertheim, E. H., Paxton, S. J., & Dun-combe, D. (2005). A prospective study of factors that leadto body dissatisfaction during pregnancy. Body Image, 2,347–361.
Smith, L. (1999). The WOMB (Women’s views of birth) antena-tal satisfaction questionnaire: Development, dimensions,internal reliability and validity. British Journal of GeneralPractice, 49, 971–975.
Statistics New Zealand. (2006). Birth rates. Retrieved Oc-tober 2010, from http://search.stats.govt.nz/search?p=KKandsrid=S2%2d4andlbc=statsnzandts=customandpw
772 KRISJANOUS, RICHARD, AND GAZLEYPsychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
Stever, G. S. (2011). Celebrity worship: Critiquing a construct.Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41, 1356–1370.
Strang, V. R., & Sullivan, P. L. (1985). Body image attitudesduring pregnancy and the postpartum period. Journal ofObstetric, Gynecologic and Neonatal Nursing, 14, 332–337.
Thompson, J. K., Heinberg, L. J., Altabe, M., & Tantleff-Dunn,S. (1999). Exacting beauty: Theory, assessment and treat-ment of body image disturbance, Washington, DC: Ameri-can Psychological Association.
Tiggemann, M., & McGill, B. (2004). The role of social compar-ison in the effect of magazine advertisements on women’smood and body dissatisfaction. Journal of Social and Clini-cal Psychology, 23, 23–44.
Tiggemann, M., Polivy J., & Hargreaves, D. (2009). The pro-cessing of thin ideals in fashion magazines: A source of so-cial comparison or fantasy? Journal of Social and ClinicalPsychology, 28, 73–93.
Tyler, I. (2001). Celebrity, pregnancy and subjectivity. In S.Ahmed & J. Stacey (Eds.), Thinking through the skin (pp.69–83). London: Routledge.
van Bussel, J. C. H., Spitz, B., & Demyttenaere, K. (2010).Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the maternalantenatal attachment scale. Archives of Women’s MentalHealth, 13, 267–277.
Van den Bergh, B., & Simons, A. (2009). A review of scales tomeasure the mother-foetus relationship. Journal of Repro-ductive and Infant Psychology, 27, 114–126.
Vickers, M. H., Breier, B. H., McCarthy, D., & Gluckman, P. D.(2003). Sedentary behaviour during postnatal life is deter-mined by prenatal environment and exacerbated by postna-tal hypercaloric nutrition. American Journal of Physiology,Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology, 285,R271–R273.
Warren, S., & Brewis, J. (2004). Matter over mind? Examiningthe experience of pregnancy. Sociology, 38, 219-236.
Weaver, J., Statham, H., & Richards, M. (2007). Are there “un-necessary” cesarean sections? Perceptions of women andobstetricians about cesarean sections for nonclinical indi-cations. Birth, 34, 32–41.
Wilkes, R. E. (1995). Household life-cycle stages, transitions,and product expenditures. Journal of Consumer Research,22, 27–42.
Womersley T. (2002). Celebrity mothers blamed after rise innumber of caesarean births. The Scotsman, 16 July, 7 p.
Correspondence regarding this article should be sent to: JayneKrisjanous, School of Marketing and International Business,Victoria University of Wellington, PO Box 600, Wellington,New Zealand ([email protected]).
APPENDIX 1
Full List of Items.
Usual concern for physical appearanceNVAN 1 The way I look is extremely important to meNVAN 2 I would be embarrassed if I were around people and did not look my bestNVAN 3 Looking my best is worth the effortPregnant celebrity attractionCELEB 1 I like seeing or reading what pregnant celebrities are doingCELEB 2 Seeing celebrities lose weight quickly after pregnancy is an inspiration for meCELEB 3 I like to copy what pregnant celebrities/stars wear in pregnancyPregnancy weight worryWEIGHT 1 I feel as if my body is out of controlWEIGHT 2 I will be anxious to get back into shape after the pregnancyWEIGHT 3 I worry that I might look fat during this pregnancyWEIGHT 4 I am embarrassed whenever I am weighedPregnancy body image dissatisfactionLOOK 1 I am proud of looking pregnantLOOK 2 I feel happy about the changes my body is going throughLOOK 3 I can look good in pregnancyPrenatal attachmentATTACH 1 I am excited about becoming a motherATTACH 2 I look forward to each new stage of the pregnancyATTACH 3 I feel that my body is achieving something extraordinaryATTACH 4 I feel attached to my babyATTACH 5 I enjoy feeling my baby move
THE PERFECT LITTLE BUMP 773Psychology and Marketing DOI: 10.1002/mar
