Faith-Anne Dohm1, Fary M Cachelin, Ruth H Striegel-Moore. 1. Graduate School of Education and Allied Professions, Fairfield University, CNS 221, 1073 North Benson Road, Fairfield, CT 06824, USA. fdohm@mail.fairfield.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Two studies explored in nonclinical samples variables that may influence meal size assessments. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: In Study 1, the contribution of dietary restraint, weight, depressive symptoms, and gender to ratings on the Food Amount Rating Scale was examined in 153 white women and 121 white men; in Study 2, the contribution of dietary restraint, weight, ethnicity, and ethnic group identification to Food Amount Rating Scale ratings was examined in 67 Asian, 81 Hispanic, and 107 white women. RESULTS: Study 1 indicated that food amounts were rated as larger when rated by male rather than female raters (male rater, mean=62.37, SD=1.14; female rater, mean=59.28, SD=0.89), for female rather than male targets (male target, mean=56.16, SD=0.97; female target, mean=64.87, SD=1.02), and by restrained rather than unrestrained eaters (restrained, mean=63.14, SD=1.11; unrestrained, mean=58.69, SD=0.91). Study 2 indicated that food amounts were rated as larger when rated by restrained eaters (restrained, mean=67.53, SD=1.21; unrestrained, mean=64.99, SD=1.09), Hispanic women (Asian, mean=64.59, SD=1.61; Hispanic, mean=68.71, SD=1.30; white, mean=65.41, SD=1.34), and underweight women (underweight, mean=70.38, SD=1.68; normal weight, mean=64.52, SD=0.93; overweight: mean=64.23, SD=1.64). DISCUSSION: Food amount judgments may be influenced by personal characteristics. Future research should examine whether variation in food amount judgments is related to dieting behavior, disordered eating, or obesity.
OBJECTIVE: Two studies explored in nonclinical samples variables that may influence meal size assessments. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: In Study 1, the contribution of dietary restraint, weight, depressive symptoms, and gender to ratings on the Food Amount Rating Scale was examined in 153 white women and 121 white men; in Study 2, the contribution of dietary restraint, weight, ethnicity, and ethnic group identification to Food Amount Rating Scale ratings was examined in 67 Asian, 81 Hispanic, and 107 white women. RESULTS: Study 1 indicated that food amounts were rated as larger when rated by male rather than female raters (male rater, mean=62.37, SD=1.14; female rater, mean=59.28, SD=0.89), for female rather than male targets (male target, mean=56.16, SD=0.97; female target, mean=64.87, SD=1.02), and by restrained rather than unrestrained eaters (restrained, mean=63.14, SD=1.11; unrestrained, mean=58.69, SD=0.91). Study 2 indicated that food amounts were rated as larger when rated by restrained eaters (restrained, mean=67.53, SD=1.21; unrestrained, mean=64.99, SD=1.09), Hispanic women (Asian, mean=64.59, SD=1.61; Hispanic, mean=68.71, SD=1.30; white, mean=65.41, SD=1.34), and underweight women (underweight, mean=70.38, SD=1.68; normal weight, mean=64.52, SD=0.93; overweight: mean=64.23, SD=1.64). DISCUSSION: Food amount judgments may be influenced by personal characteristics. Future research should examine whether variation in food amount judgments is related to dieting behavior, disordered eating, or obesity.
Authors: G P Faulkner; L K Pourshahidi; J M W Wallace; M A Kerr; T A McCaffrey; M B E Livingstone Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2013-05-07 Impact factor: 5.095