Relationship between attentional bias and stimulus control: An observational study of real-world eating patterns.

Background: Attentional bias towards food related stimuli has been proposed as a potential target for dieting intervention, however the evidence supporting a relationship between attentional bias and food intake is mixed. Theory holds that food related attentional bias should be positively associated with measures of stimulus-controlled eating, and that implicit processes such as impulsivity moderate this association. The aim of the present study was to examine whether the proposed relationship between food-related attentional bias and stimulus control exists, and whether it is moderated by impulsivity.
Method: A community sample of 68 participants completed a food-related attentional bias task and impulsiveness scale during a laboratory visit, after which they recorded their real-world eating in real-time over 14 days using Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA). During this time, participants also responded to 4-5 randomly timed assessments per day. Food outlet presence (e.g., fast food restaurants, cafes, corner stores etc.) was assessed during both eating and non-eating assessments. EMA data was then used to determine levels of stimulus controlled eating for each participant.
Findings: Substantial variation was seen in both our measure of both food-related attentional bias (Range: 33.9 to 80.0) and in the degree to which the participant's eating could be categorised as being under stimulus control (Range: 0.50 to 0.93). However, food-related attentional bias scores were not a significant independent predictor of stimulus control and nor was this relationship moderated by impulsivity.
Conclusion: Contrary to theoretical predictions, we found no evidence that of an association between attentional bias, impulsivity, and stimulus control. More work is needed to better understand the implicit processes underlying eating behaviour in the real-world.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)