Nicole R Giuliani1, A Janet Tomiyama, Traci Mann, Elliot T Berkman. 1. Department of Psychology (Giuliani, Berkman), University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon; Department of Psychology (Tomiyama), University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Department of Psychology (Mann), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Research on eating relies on various indices (e.g., stable, momentary, neural) to accurately reflect food-related reactivity (e.g., disinhibition) and regulation (e.g., restraint) outside the laboratory. The degree to which they differentially predict real-world consumption remains unclear. Further, the predictive validity of these indices might vary depending on whether an individual is actively restricting intake. METHODS: We assessed food craving reactivity and regulation in 46 healthy participants (30 women, 18-30 years) using standard measurements in three modalities: a) self-reported (stable) traits using surveys popular in the eating literature, and b) momentary craving ratings and c) neural activation using aggregated functional magnetic resonance imaging data gathered during a food reactivity-and-regulation task. We then used these data to predict variance in real-world consumption of craved energy-dense "target" foods across 2 weeks among normal-weight participants randomly assigned to restrict or monitor target food intake. RESULTS: The predictive validity of four indices varied significantly by restriction. When participants were not restricting intake, momentary (B = 0.21, standard error [SE] = 0.05) and neural (B = 0.08, SE = 0.04) reactivity positively predicted consumption, and stable (B = -0.22, SE = 0.05) and momentary (B = -0.24, SE = 0.05) regulation negatively predicted consumption. When restricting, stable (B = 0.36, SE = 0.12) and neural (B = 0.51, SE = 0.12) regulation positively predicted consumption. CONCLUSIONS: Commonly-used indices of regulation and reactivity differentially relate to an ecologically-valid eating measurement, depending on the presence of restriction goals, and thus have strong implications for predicting real-world behaviors.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Research on eating relies on various indices (e.g., stable, momentary, neural) to accurately reflect food-related reactivity (e.g., disinhibition) and regulation (e.g., restraint) outside the laboratory. The degree to which they differentially predict real-world consumption remains unclear. Further, the predictive validity of these indices might vary depending on whether an individual is actively restricting intake. METHODS: We assessed food craving reactivity and regulation in 46 healthy participants (30 women, 18-30 years) using standard measurements in three modalities: a) self-reported (stable) traits using surveys popular in the eating literature, and b) momentary craving ratings and c) neural activation using aggregated functional magnetic resonance imaging data gathered during a food reactivity-and-regulation task. We then used these data to predict variance in real-world consumption of craved energy-dense "target" foods across 2 weeks among normal-weight participants randomly assigned to restrict or monitor target food intake. RESULTS: The predictive validity of four indices varied significantly by restriction. When participants were not restricting intake, momentary (B = 0.21, standard error [SE] = 0.05) and neural (B = 0.08, SE = 0.04) reactivity positively predicted consumption, and stable (B = -0.22, SE = 0.05) and momentary (B = -0.24, SE = 0.05) regulation negatively predicted consumption. When restricting, stable (B = 0.36, SE = 0.12) and neural (B = 0.51, SE = 0.12) regulation positively predicted consumption. CONCLUSIONS: Commonly-used indices of regulation and reactivity differentially relate to an ecologically-valid eating measurement, depending on the presence of restriction goals, and thus have strong implications for predicting real-world behaviors.
Authors: Nicholas P Hays; Gaston P Bathalon; Megan A McCrory; Ronenn Roubenoff; Ruth Lipman; Susan B Roberts Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Richard B Lopez; Pin-Hao A Chen; Jeremy F Huckins; Wilhelm Hofmann; William M Kelley; Todd F Heatherton Journal: Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 3.436