OBJECTIVE: The "unit bias" has been proposed as an explanation for the portion-size effect; people consider a single unit to be an appropriate amount to eat and thus eat more when served a larger unit than when served a smaller unit. We suggest that the unit bias might be better characterized as a "segmentation effect," such that people eat less when a unit of food is separated into smaller subunits, but may eat more than a single unit. Furthermore, we suggest that portion-size effects should be independent of this segmentation effect. METHOD: In Study 1, female participants (n = 87) were served either a small or large portion of food that was either presented in the form of a single unit or multiple individually wrapped units. In Study 2, female participants (n = 42) were served a fixed portion of food that was either presented in the form of a single unit or multiple units presented on separate plates. RESULTS: Across both studies, there was no evidence that participants prefer to eat a single unit. Participants served multiple smaller units did eat less than did participants served a single larger unit, even when the overall portion size was the same, but the amount eaten was consistently more than a single unit. Furthermore, perceived norms of appropriate intake mediated the effect of unit number on food intake. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that a segmentation effect, rather than a unit bias, is driving people's food intake, with implications for designing interventions aimed at reducing excessive food intake. (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The "unit bias" has been proposed as an explanation for the portion-size effect; people consider a single unit to be an appropriate amount to eat and thus eat more when served a larger unit than when served a smaller unit. We suggest that the unit bias might be better characterized as a "segmentation effect," such that people eat less when a unit of food is separated into smaller subunits, but may eat more than a single unit. Furthermore, we suggest that portion-size effects should be independent of this segmentation effect. METHOD: In Study 1, female participants (n = 87) were served either a small or large portion of food that was either presented in the form of a single unit or multiple individually wrapped units. In Study 2, female participants (n = 42) were served a fixed portion of food that was either presented in the form of a single unit or multiple units presented on separate plates. RESULTS: Across both studies, there was no evidence that participants prefer to eat a single unit. Participants served multiple smaller units did eat less than did participants served a single larger unit, even when the overall portion size was the same, but the amount eaten was consistently more than a single unit. Furthermore, perceived norms of appropriate intake mediated the effect of unit number on food intake. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that a segmentation effect, rather than a unit bias, is driving people's food intake, with implications for designing interventions aimed at reducing excessive food intake. (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
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
Authors: Eric Robinson; Melissa Oldham; Imogen Cuckson; Jeffrey M Brunstrom; Peter J Rogers; Charlotte A Hardman Journal: Appetite Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 3.868