Search

Because overconsumption of food contributes to ill health, understanding what affects how much people eat is of importance. The 'bogus' taste test is a measure widely used in eating behaviour research to identify factors that may have a causal effect on food intake. However, there has been no examination of the validity of the bogus taste test as a measure of food intake. We conducted a participant level analysis of 31 published laboratory studies that used the taste test to measure food intake. We assessed whether the taste test was sensitive to experimental manipulations hypothesized to increase or decrease food intake. We examined construct validity by testing whether participant sex, hunger and liking of taste test food were associated with the amount of food consumed in the taste test. In addition, we also examined whether BMI (body mass index), trait measures of dietary restraint and over-eating in response to palatable food cues were associated with food consumption. Results indicated that the taste test was sensitive to experimental manipulations hypothesized to increase or decrease food intake. Factors that were reliably associated with increased consumption during the taste test were being male, have a higher baseline hunger, liking of the taste test food and a greater tendency to overeat in response to palatable food cues, whereas trait dietary restraint and BMI were not. These results indicate that the bogus taste test is likely to be a valid measure of food intake and can be used to identify factors that have a causal effect on food intake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current study used a modified implicit association test (IAT) to change implicit evaluations of unhealthy snack food and tested its effects on subsequent consumption. Furthermore, we investigated whether these effects were moderated by inhibitory self-control. A sample of 148 women (17–25 years) motivated to manage weight through healthy eating completed an IAT intervention, and pre- and post-intervention IATs assessing implicit evaluations of unhealthy food. The intervention IAT trained participants to pair unhealthy food stimuli with either positive or negative stimuli. A task disguised as a taste-test was used to assess consumption of unhealthy snack foods. Inhibitory self-control was measured using a self-report scale. As predicted, the implicit evaluation of unhealthy food became more negative from pre- to post-training among participants in the food negative pairing condition; however, there was no corresponding change in the food positive pairing condition. The effect of the training on snack consumption was moderated by inhibitory self-control with only participants low in inhibitory self-control having lower snack intake following the food negative training. This finding is consistent with dual-process models of behaviour which predict that self-control capacity renders impulses less influential on behaviour. Furthermore, it suggests that an intervention that retrains implicit food evaluations could be effective at reducing unhealthy eating, particularly among those with low inhibitory self-control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

External influences on eating behaviour, such as portion size, have been reliably shown to influence food intake in the laboratory. However, little research has examined whether laboratory settings under or overestimate the effect that external influences have on food intake compared to when studied in the real-world. In Study 1, 60 participants (mean age = 32 years) were randomized to consume a large (200 g) or small (100 g) portion of popcorn under controlled laboratory conditions and during a separate session in their home. Results showed that the effect of portion size on food intake was larger at home (d = 0.97) than in the laboratory (d = 0.56). Furthermore, participants reported feeling more relaxed eating at home compared to the laboratory. In Study 2, we examined whether comparable results were observed in a semi-naturalistic laboratory designed to resemble a home setting. 59 participants (mean age = 28 years) completed the same procedure as Study 1 in a standard and a semi-naturalistic laboratory setting. Although participants reported having higher levels of private self-awareness in the standard laboratory, the effect that portion size had on food intake did not differ between the standard laboratory (d = 0.50) and the semi-naturalistic laboratory (d = 0.49). The impact that external influences on eating, such as portion size, have on food intake in the real-world may be underestimated when studied under laboratory conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Portion size impacts on the amount of energy consumed during a meal. However, research findings on participant characteristics that moderate the effect of portion size on energy intake are mixed. Using data pooled across three randomized control trials, we examined the impact of reducing meal portion size on meal energy intake in 111 adult participants varying in sex (55 M, 56 F), body weight (BMI range = 19-42) and a broad range of participant characteristics, including usual portion size, restrained, emotional and external eating, satiety responsiveness, plate clearing tendencies, concerns about wasting food and self-control. In each trial, a repeated-measures design was used and participants consumed three ad-libitum lunchtime meals differing in portion size; large-normal portion size condition (100%) vs. small-normal portion size condition (~ 75%) vs. smaller than normal portion size condition (~ 50%). In mixed ANOVAs, we did not find convincing evidence that any participant characteristic reliably moderated the impact that reducing portion size had on energy intake. For the majority of participants energy intake decreased when portion size was reduced and it was more common for participants to consistently reduce their energy intake than consume a similar amount when portion size was reduced. We also found little evidence that a sub-group of participants existed whose energy intake was consistently resistant to portion size reductions. Portion size may be a universal driver of energy intake, as reducing meal portion size appears to decrease meal energy intake among most people. Food portion downsizing may therefore be an equitable intervention approach to reducing population level energy intake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Skin cancer presents a significant public health burden in Australia. The present study aimed to supplement population-based estimates of sun protection behaviour by examining setting-specific trends in directly observed sun protection in public outdoor leisure settings. Repeated cross-sectional observational surveys of adolescents and adults were conducted on summer weekends between 11 am and 3 pm from 1992 to 2002, 2006 to 2012, and 2018 to 2019 (N = 44,979) at pools/beaches and parks/gardens within 25 km of the centre of Melbourne, Victoria. The primary outcome was a binary index representing individuals having above or below the median level of body surface covered by hat, shirt, and leg garments in each setting type. The prevalence of above-median body coverage increased between 1992 and 2002 in both settings. At pools/beaches, a slight decline in above-median body coverage between 2006 and 2019 in males and females (adjusted odds ratio, AOR = 0.96 [0.94, 0.97]; 0.94 [0.93, 0.95]) appeared to be driven by a decline in leg coverage, while arm coverage, hat, sunglasses, and shade use remained stable. At parks/gardens, a decline in above-median body coverage between 2006 and 2019 (AOR = 0.90 [0.89, 0.91]; 0.94 [0.93, 0.95]) was accompanied by small declines across other protective behaviours that varied between males and females. Patterns in protective behaviours observed in outdoor leisure settings may reflect the changing composition of individuals choosing to remain outdoors during peak UV times and highlight the importance of continued promotion and monitoring of the use of multiple measures to protect against UV damage in Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research conducted in controlled laboratory settings plays an important role in understanding human eating behaviour. However, participant characteristics may affect motivation to participate in laboratory eating behaviour research and result in self-selection biases. First-year psychology students (n = 207, 90.8% female, m age = 18.8, m BMI = 21.9) were led to believe that they were choosing between enrolling in one of two laboratory-based studies: an 'advertising' study, or an 'advertising and food' study; the latter specified that participants would consume food and answer questions about their eating behaviour. Participants subsequently reported demographic information and completed a series of questionnaires assessing psychological characteristics hypothesised to predict self-selection in laboratory eating studies. The majority of participants preferred to participate in a study unrelated to eating over an eating-related study (70.5%, χ2 (1) = 34.90, p < .001). Participants choosing the eating-related study over the non-eating study had higher self-reported external eating tendencies and positive preoccupations with food, lower negative preoccupations with food and social appearance anxiety. Participants choosing the eating related study were also more likely to be male than female, although the number of males in the study was small (n = 19) and this finding should therefore be interpreted with caution. The present study provides some evidence that in university based samples of participants there are likely self-selection biases in laboratory-based eating behaviour studies and researchers may benefit from considering the potential influence of self-selection biases when conducting eating behaviour research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Demand characteristics are thought to undermine the validity of psychological research, but the extent to which participant awareness of study hypotheses affects laboratory-measured eating behaviour studies has received limited attention. Participants (N = 84) attended two laboratory sessions in which food intake was measured. In session 1 baseline food intake was measured. In session 2 participants were allocated to either a 'hypothesis aware' or 'hypothesis unaware' condition. Participants were led to believe in the 'hypothesis aware' condition that they were expected to increase their food intake in session 2 relative to session 1. Participants in the 'hypothesis unaware' condition were not provided with hypothesis information. Contrary to our pre-registered predictions, the experimental manipulation of hypothesis awareness did not affect session 2 food intake. However, the manipulation was less effective than anticipated as some participants did not appear to believe the hypothesis information provided. Post-hoc exploratory analyses revealed that participants who believed the study hypothesis was that their food intake would increase in session 2 ate more in session 2 than participants who did not believe this was the study hypothesis. Further confirmatory research is required to understand the causal effect that participant awareness of study hypotheses has on laboratory measured eating behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]