| Literature DB >> 25490404 |
Laura Miccoli1, Rafael Delgado1, Sonia Rodríguez-Ruiz1, Pedro Guerra1, Eduardo García-Mármol2, M Carmen Fernández-Santaella1.
Abstract
In the last decades, food pictures have been repeatedly employed to investigate the emotional impact of food on healthy participants as well as individuals who suffer from eating disorders and obesity. However, despite their widespread use, food pictures are typically selected according to each researcher's personal criteria, which make it difficult to reliably select food images and to compare results across different studies and laboratories. Therefore, to study affective reactions to food, it becomes pivotal to identify the emotional impact of specific food images based on wider samples of individuals. In the present paper we introduce the Open Library of Affective Foods (OLAF), which is a set of original food pictures created to reliably select food pictures based on the emotions they prompt, as indicated by affective ratings of valence, arousal, and dominance and by an additional food craving scale. OLAF images were designed to allow simultaneous use with affective images from the International Affective Picture System (IAPS), which is a well-known instrument to investigate emotional reactions in the laboratory. The ultimate goal of the OLAF is to contribute to understanding how food is emotionally processed in healthy individuals and in patients who suffer from eating and weight-related disorders. The present normative data, which was based on a large sample of an adolescent population, indicate that when viewing affective non-food IAPS images, valence, arousal, and dominance ratings were in line with expected patterns based on previous emotion research. Moreover, when viewing food pictures, affective and food craving ratings were consistent with research on food cue processing. As a whole, the data supported the methodological and theoretical reliability of the OLAF ratings, therefore providing researchers with a standardized tool to reliably investigate the emotional and motivational significance of food. The OLAF database is publicly available at zenodo.org.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25490404 PMCID: PMC4260831 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0114515
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1SAM food craving scale.
Initially developed to assess tobacco craving [32], the SAM food craving scale ranges from a drooling to a mouth-shut SAM.
Participants characteristics.
| Total Sample N559 | Boys | Girls | ||
| N | mean (SD) | N | mean (SD) | |
| Age (years) | 275 | 14.37 (1.41) | 284 | 14.15 (1.45) |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 275 | 21.54 (4.19) | 284 | 21.62 (4.15) |
| Hunger (y/n, 1–9) no hunger | 208 | 2.05 (1.28) | 239 | 1.85 (1.30) |
| yes, hunger | 67 | 5.88 (2.21) | 45 | 5.71 (2.13) |
| Food Craving-Trait | 275 | 86.42 (30.99) | 283 | 85.15 (29.53) |
| Self-Esteem | 274 | 31.22 (4.79) | 284 | 28.64 (5.53) |
| Sensitivity to Reward | 275 | 8.09 (2.72) | 284 | 6.67 (2.96) |
| Sensitivity to Punishment | 275 | 5.39 (3.12) | 284 | 7.07 (3.54) |
Descriptive statistics (N and mean (standard deviation)) for some basic characteristics of the sample (age, BMI, hunger) and for personality traits (Food Craving-Trait, [39]; Self-Esteem, using a Spanish adaptation of Rosenberg's scale [40], [41]; Sensitivity to Reward/Sensitivity to Punishment, [42]). Self-reported hunger was assessed before the rating procedure began, as both a dichotomous “yes/no” variable (“Are you hungry right now?”) and as a continuous variable, using a 1–9 Likert scale (“On a 1 to 9 scale, where 1 means ‘no hunger at all’ and 9 means ‘a lot of hunger’, how much hunger do you feel right now?”).
Descriptive statistics are provided separately for boys and girls.
Figure 2Affective Space.
Bidimensional plot of each affective or food image as a function of its mean valence and arousal ratings. Each point in the plot represents the valence and arousal ratings for an IAPS (red, gray, and blue) or food picture (plotted in different colors, based on food category). The position within the “affective space” of all food and IAPS pictures display the “boomerang” shape repeatedly reported in emotion research. Regression lines are plotted separately for appetitive (valence ratings>5) and defensive contents (valence ratings <5). All food and pleasant images are located on the upper arm of the boomerang, assumed to reflect the appetitive motivational system, while fewer unpleasant images are located in the lower arm of the boomerang, corresponding to the defensive motivational system. Among the food pictures, it can be appreciated that pictures depicting vegetables lie closer to neutral contents while pictures depicting sweet high-fat foods are located closer to pleasant IAPS images.
Figure 3Valence, Arousal, Dominance, and Food Craving ratings across picture categories.
Evaluative judgments of valence (panel a, top left), arousal (panel b, top right), dominance (panel c, bottom left), and food craving (panel d, bottom right) for affective and food picture categories. In each panel, affective categories (with pictures taken from the International Affective Picture System) are on the left, while food categories from the OLAF are on the right.
Top ranked food items, based on valence and arousal ratings.
| OLAF code | description | valence | arousal | dominance | craving | number particip | valAro ranking | craving ranking |
| sug_4421 | Waffles | 7.92 | 5.27 | 6.57 | 7.15 | 134 |
| 1 |
| sug_0083 | Candies | 7.74 | 5.42 | 6.62 | 6.73 | 134 |
| 3 |
| sug_0141 | Crepes | 7.77 | 4.77 | 6.59 | 6.68 | 134 |
| 5 |
| sug_0152 | Donuts | 7.68 | 4.81 | 6.69 | 6.57 | 134 |
| 7 |
| sug_0157 | Donuts | 7.59 | 4.65 | 6.56 | 6.90 | 135 |
| 2 |
| sug_0014 | Waffles | 7.49 | 4.73 | 6.45 | 6.46 | 148 |
| 12 |
| sug_0018 | Waffles | 7.49 | 4.63 | 6.42 | 6.72 | 135 |
| 4 |
| sug_0013 | Crepes | 7.46 | 4.63 | 6.42 | 6.51 | 135 |
| 10 |
| fat_5557 | Pizza | 7.48 | 4.59 | 6.57 | 6.55 | 148 |
| 9 |
| sug_0113 | IceCream | 7.52 | 4.44 | 6.33 | 6.41 | 135 |
| 14 |
Top ranked food items, based on food craving ratings.
| OLAF code | description | valence | arousal | dominance | craving | number particip | valAro ranking | craving ranking |
| sug_4421 | Waffles | 7.92 | 5.27 | 6.57 | 7.15 | 134 | 1 |
|
| sug_0157 | Donuts | 7.59 | 4.65 | 6.56 | 6.90 | 135 | 5 |
|
| sug_0083 | Candies | 7.74 | 5.42 | 6.62 | 6.73 | 134 | 2 |
|
| sug_0018 | Waffles | 7.49 | 4.63 | 6.42 | 6.72 | 135 | 7 |
|
| sug_0141 | Crepes | 7.77 | 4.77 | 6.59 | 6.68 | 134 | 3 |
|
| sug_0072 | Waffles | 7.42 | 4.43 | 6.49 | 6.61 | 142 | 14 |
|
| sug_0152 | Donuts | 7.68 | 4.81 | 6.69 | 6.57 | 134 | 4 |
|
| fat_0075 | MeatDish | 7.29 | 4.26 | 6.34 | 6.55 | 134 | 22 |
|
| fat_5557 | Pizza | 7.48 | 4.59 | 6.57 | 6.55 | 148 | 9 |
|
| sug_0013 | Crepes | 7.46 | 4.63 | 6.42 | 6.51 | 135 | 8 |
|
First 10 top-ranked food items, with food pictures sorted as a function of both valence and arousal ratings (Table 2) and of food craving ratings (Table 3).
Each table includes, for each food picture: its OLAF code, a description of its content, mean SAM ratings (for Valence, Arousal, Dominance, and Food Craving), the number of participants contributing to the average ratings, the ranking of that specific picture based on both valence and arousal ratings, and on food craving ratings.