Nuala Bobowski1,2, Julie A Mennella1. 1. 1 Monell Chemical Senses Center , Philadelphia, PA. 2. 2 Department of Nutrition and Exercise Sciences, St. Catherine University , St. Paul, MN.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Use of nonnutritive sweeteners (NNSs), which provide sweet taste with few to no calories, has increased, but data on whether children's hedonic responses to NNSs differ from nutritive sugars or from adults' hedonic responses are limited. METHODS: Most preferred levels of sucrose and the NNS sucralose were determined via a forced-choice tracking procedure in 48 children, 7-14 years (mean = 10 years), and 34 adults. Each participant also rated the liking of these taste stimuli, as well as varying concentrations of aspartame on 3- and 5-point facial hedonic scales. Anthropometric measures were obtained, and motives for palatable food intake were assessed with the Palatable Eating Motives Scale (PEMS, adults) and Kids PEMS. RESULTS: While use of the 3-point scale showed no age-related differences in liking of sweeteners, the 5-point scale showed that more children than adults liked higher concentrations of sucrose, sucralose, and aspartame, and the tracking procedure showed that children most preferred higher concentrations of sucrose and sucralose than adults. Regardless of age, sweet preference did not differ between obese and nonobese participants and showed no association with motives for eating palatable foods. Children's body mass index z-scores were positively associated with social and conformity motive scores for eating palatable foods. CONCLUSION: Research should move beyond measures of variation in sweet taste hedonics to include identifying motives, and the physiological and psychological consequences of eating sweets, to shed light on what children are more vulnerable to develop unfavorable eating habits, increasing risk for obesity, and other diseases.
BACKGROUND: Use of nonnutritive sweeteners (NNSs), which provide sweet taste with few to no calories, has increased, but data on whether children's hedonic responses to NNSs differ from nutritive sugars or from adults' hedonic responses are limited. METHODS: Most preferred levels of sucrose and the NNS sucralose were determined via a forced-choice tracking procedure in 48 children, 7-14 years (mean = 10 years), and 34 adults. Each participant also rated the liking of these taste stimuli, as well as varying concentrations of aspartame on 3- and 5-point facial hedonic scales. Anthropometric measures were obtained, and motives for palatable food intake were assessed with the Palatable Eating Motives Scale (PEMS, adults) and Kids PEMS. RESULTS: While use of the 3-point scale showed no age-related differences in liking of sweeteners, the 5-point scale showed that more children than adults liked higher concentrations of sucrose, sucralose, and aspartame, and the tracking procedure showed that children most preferred higher concentrations of sucrose and sucralose than adults. Regardless of age, sweet preference did not differ between obese and nonobese participants and showed no association with motives for eating palatable foods. Children's body mass index z-scores were positively associated with social and conformity motive scores for eating palatable foods. CONCLUSION: Research should move beyond measures of variation in sweet taste hedonics to include identifying motives, and the physiological and psychological consequences of eating sweets, to shed light on what children are more vulnerable to develop unfavorable eating habits, increasing risk for obesity, and other diseases.
Authors: Susan E Coldwell; Julie A Mennella; Valerie B Duffy; Marcia L Pelchat; James W Griffith; Gregory Smutzer; Beverly J Cowart; Paul A S Breslin; Linda M Bartoshuk; Lloyd Hastings; David Victorson; Howard J Hoffman Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-03-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Janne C de Ruyter; Martijn B Katan; Lothar D J Kuijper; Djin G Liem; Margreet R Olthof Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-10-22 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Harriet Okronipa; Mary Arimond; Charles D Arnold; Rebecca R Young; Seth Adu-Afarwuah; Solace M Tamakloe; Maku E Ocansey; Sika M Kumordzie; Brietta M Oaks; Julie A Mennella; Kathryn G Dewey Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: A C Sylvetsky; A Hiedacavage; N Shah; P Pokorney; S Baldauf; K Merrigan; V Smith; M W Long; R Black; K Robien; N Avena; C Gaine; D Greenberg; M G Wootan; S Talegawkar; U Colon-Ramos; M Leahy; A Ohmes; J A Mennella; J Sacheck; W H Dietz Journal: Obes Sci Pract Date: 2019-04-11
Authors: Rocio Barragán; Oscar Coltell; Olga Portolés; Eva M Asensio; José V Sorlí; Carolina Ortega-Azorín; José I González; Carmen Sáiz; Rebeca Fernández-Carrión; Jose M Ordovas; Dolores Corella Journal: Nutrients Date: 2018-10-18 Impact factor: 5.717