F R O Penaforte1, C C Japur, R W Diez-Garcia, J C Hernandez, I Palmma-Linares, P G Chiarello. 1. Department of Nutrition, Institute of Health Sciences, Federal University of Triângulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Brazil; Laboratory of Eating Practices and Behavior (PratiCA), Course of Nutrition and Metabolism, Faculty of Medicine of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidences have suggested that larger utensils may provoke 'size-contrast illusions', influencing the perceived volume and food consumption. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the influence of plate size on the visual estimate of food portion size. METHODS: Two 400 g portions of pasta with tomato sauce were presented on two plates of different diameters (24.0 and 9.0 cm). Each participant visually estimated on an individual basis the quantities of the pasta portions (g) present on each plate. In addition, each subject classified the size of the portions on each plate as 'small', 'medium' and 'large'. The mean estimates of the amount of pasta on each plate were compared by the nonparametric Mann-Whitney. The differences in the frequencies of portion classifications between plates were evaluated by the chi-squared test. RESULTS: Forty-eight students (average 25.8 ± 8.9 years) participated in the study. There was no difference in the median amount of pasta estimated for the large and small plates (150 g; range 50-500 and 115 g; range 40-500 g, respectively). The classification of the portion size as 'large' was reported by a significantly greater number of persons when they evaluated the amount of pasta arranged on the large plate compared to the small plate (47.9 versus 22.9%, respectively; P = 0.018). CONCLUSION: The size of the plate did not influence the estimate of food portions, even though it did influence the classification of portion size.
BACKGROUND: Evidences have suggested that larger utensils may provoke 'size-contrast illusions', influencing the perceived volume and food consumption. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the influence of plate size on the visual estimate of food portion size. METHODS: Two 400 g portions of pasta with tomato sauce were presented on two plates of different diameters (24.0 and 9.0 cm). Each participant visually estimated on an individual basis the quantities of the pasta portions (g) present on each plate. In addition, each subject classified the size of the portions on each plate as 'small', 'medium' and 'large'. The mean estimates of the amount of pasta on each plate were compared by the nonparametric Mann-Whitney. The differences in the frequencies of portion classifications between plates were evaluated by the chi-squared test. RESULTS: Forty-eight students (average 25.8 ± 8.9 years) participated in the study. There was no difference in the median amount of pasta estimated for the large and small plates (150 g; range 50-500 and 115 g; range 40-500 g, respectively). The classification of the portion size as 'large' was reported by a significantly greater number of persons when they evaluated the amount of pasta arranged on the large plate compared to the small plate (47.9 versus 22.9%, respectively; P = 0.018). CONCLUSION: The size of the plate did not influence the estimate of food portions, even though it did influence the classification of portion size.
Authors: Joel W Hughes; Carly M Goldstein; Carly Logan; Jessica L Mulvany; Misty A W Hawkins; Amy F Sato; John Gunstad Journal: BMC Obes Date: 2017-07-28
Authors: Ashleigh Haynes; Charlotte A Hardman; Alexis D J Makin; Jason C G Halford; Susan A Jebb; Eric Robinson Journal: Food Qual Prefer Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 5.565