Literature DB >> 21233814

The 100-calorie semi-solution: sub-packaging most reduces intake among the heaviest.

Brian Wansink1, Collin R Payne, Mitsuru Shimizu.   

Abstract

This study addresses two questions about sub-packaging: (i) Do 100-calorie packages reduce the calorie intake of overweight individuals differently than normal-weight individuals? (ii) Do they enable individuals to accurately track intake? Thirty-seven undergraduates were randomly given either four 100-calorie packages of crackers or one 400-calorie package of crackers to eat while watching television. The average participant ate 25.2% (75.1 calories) less when given four 100-calorie packages of crackers than when given one 400-calorie package (P = 0.006). In addition, much of this influence was driven by overweight participants whose intake decreased by 54.1%. However, all of the participants underestimated their consumption by 60% or more, indicating that sub-packaging does not appear to increase one's accuracy in estimating how much is consumed. Smaller sized sub-packaging most greatly benefits those who are overweight, yet it does so without making people more aware of how much they have eaten.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21233814     DOI: 10.1038/oby.2010.306

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obesity (Silver Spring)        ISSN: 1930-7381            Impact factor:   5.002


  7 in total

Review 1.  Portion size and obesity.

Authors:  M Barbara E Livingstone; L Kirsty Pourshahidi
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 8.701

2.  Candy consumption patterns, effects on health, and behavioral strategies to promote moderation: summary report of a roundtable discussion.

Authors:  Roberta L Duyff; Leann L Birch; Carol Byrd-Bredbenner; Susan L Johnson; Richard D Mattes; Mary M Murphy; Theresa A Nicklas; Brandi Y Rollins; Brian Wansink
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2015-01-15       Impact factor: 8.701

Review 3.  Weighing the Evidence of Common Beliefs in Obesity Research.

Authors:  Krista Casazza; Andrew Brown; Arne Astrup; Fredrik Bertz; Charles Baum; Michelle Bohan Brown; John Dawson; Nefertiti Durant; Gareth Dutton; David A Fields; Kevin R Fontaine; Steven Heymsfield; David Levitsky; Tapan Mehta; Nir Menachemi; P K Newby; Russell Pate; Hollie Raynor; Barbara J Rolls; Bisakha Sen; Daniel L Smith; Diana Thomas; Brian Wansink; David B Allison
Journal:  Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 11.176

4.  Depicted serving size: cereal packaging pictures exaggerate serving sizes and promote overserving.

Authors:  Aner Tal; Stina Niemann; Brian Wansink
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2017-02-06       Impact factor: 3.295

Review 5.  The Effect of Downsizing Packages of Energy-Dense, Nutrient-Poor Snacks and Drinks on Consumption, Intentions, and Perceptions-A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Qingzhou Liu; Lok Yin Tam; Anna Rangan
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 5.717

Review 6.  Portion, package or tableware size for changing selection and consumption of food, alcohol and tobacco.

Authors:  Gareth J Hollands; Ian Shemilt; Theresa M Marteau; Susan A Jebb; Hannah B Lewis; Yinghui Wei; Julian P T Higgins; David Ogilvie
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-09-14

Review 7.  What is the role of portion control in weight management?

Authors:  B J Rolls
Journal:  Int J Obes (Lond)       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 5.095

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.