| Literature DB >> 30142187 |
María Moreno-Padilla1, María José Fernández-Serrano1, Gustavo A Reyes Del Paso1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of exposure to a food-choice task (appetizing versus healthy food) on risky decision-making by excess versus normal weight adolescents. We also analyzed the influence of food visualization on hunger levels, as well as group differences in food choices and impulsivity.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30142187 PMCID: PMC6108517 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202994
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Participants’ socio-demographic characteristics, BMI and percentage of body fat.
| Excess weight | Normal weight | t | p | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | ||||
| Age | 15.28 | 1.82 | 15.43 | 1.39 | -0.36 | 0.723 | |
| Sex (%Men/women) | 46.7/53.3 | 36.7/63.3 | 1.72 | 0.189 | |||
| BMI | 28.33 | 2.74 | 20.12 | 2.05 | 12.76 | <0.001 | |
| % Body fat | 27.34 | 7.71 | 17.90 | 7.16 | 4.75 | <0.001 | |
avalue of Student’s t
bvalue of Chi-square χ2
Means and standard deviations (SD) of impulsivity (UPPS-P), hunger (VAS) measures, appetizing and healthy choices.
Results of the group comparisons (t and p) are also displayed.
| Excess weight | Normal weight | t | p | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |||
| UPPS-P Urg- | 11.89 | 8.65 | 10.90 | 3.44 | 0.57 | 0.570 |
| UPPS-P Urg+ | 9.96 | 2.12 | 8.86 | 1.73 | 2.14 | 0.037 |
| UPPS-P SS | 11.19 | 2.63 | 9.62 | 2.74 | 2.17 | 0.034 |
| UPPS-P LPrem | 8.37 | 1.94 | 8.24 | 2.59 | 0.21 | 0.835 |
| UPPS-P LPers | 7.63 | 2.10 | 8.31 | 2.56 | -1.08 | 0.284 |
| UPPS-P Total | 46.04 | 9.63 | 47.03 | 8.09 | -0.42 | 0.676 |
| Hunger Pre | 1.35 | 1.48 | 2.35 | 2.26 | -1.94 | 0.057 |
| A_Choices | 7.11 | 2.06 | 4.38 | 2.53 | 4.41 | <0.001 |
Note: Urg-: Negative Urgency; Urg+: Positive Urgency; SS: Sensation Seeking; LPrem: Lack of Premeditation; LPers: Lack of Perseverance; A_Choices: appetizing choices; H_Choices: healthy choices
Fig 1Average number of pumps on unexploded balloons in the pre-task and post-task evaluations as a function of group.
Fig 2Number of exploded balloons in the pre-task and post-task evaluations as a function of group.
Pearson correlations between variables in the whole sample.
| Hunger_ | UPPSP_ | UPPSP_ | UPPSP_ | BMI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hunger_change | 1 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.34 | 0.25 |
| EB_Change | 0.33 | -0.13 | -0.08 | 0.23 | 0.30 |
| ANPUB_Change | 0.08 | -0.20 | 0.09 | 0.17 | 0.18 |
| EB_PRE | 0.20 | 0.16 | 0.06 | 0.22 | 0.09 |
| EB_POST | 0.43 | 0.01 | -0.02 | 0.37 | 0.33 |
| ANPUB_PRE | 0.28 | 0.14 | -0.06 | 0.18 | 0.11 |
| ANPUB_POST | 0.34 | -0.06 | 0.02 | 0.28 | 0.22 |
| A_Choices | 0.24 | 0.42 | 0.36 | 0.27 | 0.45 |
| BMI | 0.25 | 0.04 | 0.33 | 0.27 | 1 |
EB: Exploited Balloons; ANPUB: Average Number of Pumps on Unexploded Balloons
T: total; U+: Positive Urgency; SS: Sensation Seeking; A_Choices: appetizing choices; BMI: Body Mass Index
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
Pearson correlations between variables in excess weight group.
| Hunger_ | UPPSP_ | UPPSP_ | UPPSP_ | BMI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hunger_change | 1 | 0.14 | -0.11 | 0.49 | -0.30 |
| EB_Change | 0.46 | 0.03 | -0.16 | 0.16 | 0.06 |
| ANPUB_Change | 0.14 | -0.19 | 0.14 | -0.17 | -0.14 |
| EB_PRE | 0.32 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.38 | -0.01 |
| EB_POST | 0.60 | 0.07 | -0.07 | 0.41 | 0.04 |
| ANPUB_PRE | 0.43 | 0.26 | -0.01 | 0.38 | -0.01 |
| ANPUB_POST | 0.48 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.27 | -0.15 |
| A_Choices | 0.24 | 0.57 | 0.20 | 0.23 | 0.22 |
| BMI | -0.30 | 0.12 | 0.22 | 0.01 | 1 |
EB: Exploited Balloons; ANPUB: Average Number of Pumps on Unexploded Balloons
T: total; U+: Positive Urgency; SS: Sensation Seeking; A_Choices: appetizing choices; BMI: Body Mass Index
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
Pearson correlations between variables in normal weight group.
| Hunger_ | UPPSP_ | UPPSP_ | UPPSP_ | BMI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hunger_change | 1 | -0.04 | -0.03 | -0.03 | 0.14 |
| EB_Change | -0.14 | -0.30 | -0.25 | 0.13 | -0.07 |
| ANPUB_Change | -0.27 | -0.19 | -0.14 | 0.29 | -0.24 |
| EB_PRE | 0.03 | 0.27 | 0.04 | 0.07 | 0.32 |
| EB_POST | -0.10 | -0.02 | -0.19 | 0.19 | 0.24 |
| ANPUB_PRE | 0.10 | 0.04 | -0.14 | 0.01 | 0.27 |
| ANPUB_POST | -0.04 | -0.11 | -0.21 | 0.18 | 0.06 |
| A_Choices | -0.15 | 0.51 | 0.32 | 0.10 | -0.18 |
| BMI | 0.14 | 0.26 | 0.12 | 0.12 | 1 |
EB: Exploited Balloons; ANPUB: Average Number of Pumps on Unexploded Balloons
T: total; U+: Positive Urgency; SS: Sensation Seeking; A_Choices: appetizing choices; BMI: Body Mass Index
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)