Literature DB >> 29154609

Influence of sedentary, social, and physical alternatives on food reinforcement.

Katelyn A Carr1, Leonard H Epstein1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the potential for nonfood alternative activities to compete with the reinforcing value of food. Participants rated the frequency and pleasantness of engaging in a variety of activities and made hypothetical choices between food and 4 types of alternatives; cognitive-enriching (reading, listening to music), social (attending a party or event), sedentary (watching TV), and physically active (running, biking).
METHOD: Two-hundred seventy-six adults completed an online survey using a crowdsourcing platform.
RESULTS: Adults with higher BMI reported engaging in fewer activities within the cognitive-enriching, social, and physically active categories. When examining how well each alternative activity type was able to compete with food, sedentary alternatives were associated with the highest food reinforcement, or were least able to compete with food reinforcers, as compared with cognitive-enriching, social, and physical. Social activities were associated with the lowest food reinforcement, or the best able to compete with food reinforcers.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest that increasing the frequency and range of nonfood alternative activities may be important to obesity. This study also suggests that the class of social activities may have the biggest impact on reducing food reinforcement, and the class of sedentary may have the smallest effect on food reinforcement. These tools have relevance to clinical interventions that capitalize on increasing access to behaviors that can reduce the motivation to eat in clinical interventions for obesity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29154609      PMCID: PMC5794615          DOI: 10.1037/hea0000563

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Psychol        ISSN: 0278-6133            Impact factor:   4.267


  36 in total

1.  Measuring substance-free and substance-related reinforcement in the natural environment.

Authors:  Christopher J Correia; Kate B Carey; Brian Borsari
Journal:  Psychol Addict Behav       Date:  2002-03

2.  Healthy eating behaviors and the cognitive environment are positively associated in low-income households with young children.

Authors:  Joy Rickman Pieper; Shannon E Whaley
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2011-04-08       Impact factor: 3.868

3.  Television watching increases motivated responding for food and energy intake in children.

Authors:  Jennifer L Temple; April M Giacomelli; Kristine M Kent; James N Roemmich; Leonard H Epstein
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 7.045

4.  Will work for snack food: the association of BMI and snack reinforcement.

Authors:  Janneke C A H Giesen; Remco C Havermans; Anne Douven; Mignon Tekelenburg; Anita Jansen
Journal:  Obesity (Silver Spring)       Date:  2010-02-11       Impact factor: 5.002

5.  Taste and food reinforcement in non-overweight youth.

Authors:  Leonard H Epstein; Katelyn A Carr; Jennifer L Scheid; Eden Gebre; Alexis O'Brien; Rocco A Paluch; Jennifer L Temple
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2015-04-16       Impact factor: 3.868

6.  Sensitization of food reinforcement is related to weight status and baseline food reinforcement.

Authors:  J L Temple; L H Epstein
Journal:  Int J Obes (Lond)       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 5.095

7.  The relative reinforcing value of food predicts weight gain in a longitudinal study of 7--10-y-old children.

Authors:  Claire Hill; Jenny Saxton; Laura Webber; John Blundell; Jane Wardle
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2009-06-17       Impact factor: 7.045

8.  Estimation of percent overweight within families.

Authors:  L H Epstein; J McCurley; R C Murdock
Journal:  Addict Behav       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 3.913

9.  Behavioral economic predictors of overweight children's weight loss.

Authors:  John R Best; Kelly R Theim; Dana M Gredysa; Richard I Stein; R Robinson Welch; Brian E Saelens; Michael G Perri; Kenneth B Schechtman; Leonard H Epstein; Denise E Wilfley
Journal:  J Consult Clin Psychol       Date:  2012-08-27

10.  Food reinforcement, the dopamine D2 receptor genotype, and energy intake in obese and nonobese humans.

Authors:  Leonard H Epstein; Jennifer L Temple; Brad J Neaderhiser; Robbert J Salis; Richard W Erbe; John J Leddy
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 1.912

View more
  5 in total

1.  Binary components of food reinforcement: Amplitude and persistence.

Authors:  Leonard H Epstein; Jeffrey S Stein; Rocco A Paluch; James MacKillop; Warren K Bickel
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2017-08-26       Impact factor: 3.868

Review 2.  Choice is relative: Reinforcing value of food and activity in obesity treatment.

Authors:  Katelyn A Carr; Leonard H Epstein
Journal:  Am Psychol       Date:  2020 Feb-Mar

Review 3.  Environmental enrichment reduces food seeking and taking in rats: A review.

Authors:  Jeffrey W Grimm; Frances Sauter
Journal:  Pharmacol Biochem Behav       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 3.533

4.  Sensitization of the reinforcing value of food: a novel risk factor for overweight in adolescents.

Authors:  Jennifer L Temple; Amanda M Ziegler; Amanda K Crandall; Tegan Mansouri; Leonard H Epstein
Journal:  Int J Obes (Lond)       Date:  2020-07-14       Impact factor: 5.095

5.  Sensitization of the reinforcing value of high energy density foods is associated with increased zBMI gain in adolescents.

Authors:  Jennifer L Temple; Amanda M Ziegler; Amanda K Crandall; Tegan Mansouri; Lori Hatzinger; Rachel Barich; Leonard H Epstein
Journal:  Int J Obes (Lond)       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 5.095

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.