Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Prior studies have documented a negative relationship between strength of executive control resources (ECRs) and frequency of snack food consumption. However, little is known about what effect environmental cues (restraining versus facilitating) have on the engagement of such control resources. We presented 88 healthy adults with standardized tests of ECRs followed by a bogus taste test for three appetitive snack foods. Participants were randomly assigned to receive instructions to eat the bare minimum to make their ratings (“restraint condition”), eat as much as they like (“facilitation condition”) or no special instructions. We surreptitiously measured the weight of food consumed during the taste test. Findings revealed a main effect of treatment condition, such that those in the restraint condition ate significantly less than those in either of the other conditions; however, this main effect was qualified by an ECR by treatment condition interaction. Specifically, those in the facilitation condition showed a strong negative association between ECR strength and amount of food consumed, whereas those in the restraint and control conditions did not. Findings suggest that the effect of ECR strength on consumption of snack food varies substantially by the characteristics of contextual cues.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Baddeley, A. (1996). Exploring the central executive. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49, 5–28. CrossRef
Forslund, H. B., Torgerson, J. S., Sjöström, L., & Lindroos, A. K. (2005). Snacking frequency in relation to energy intake and food choices in obese men and women compared to a reference population. International Journal of Obesity, 29, 711–719. CrossRef
Hall, P. A., & Fong, G. T. (2007). Temporal self-regulation theory: A model for individual health behavior. Health Psychology Review, 1, 6–52. CrossRef
Hall, P. A., & Fong, G. T. (2013). Temporal self-regulation theory: Integrating biological, psychological, and ecological determinants of health behavior performance. In P. Hall (Ed.), Social neuroscience and public health: Foundations for the science of chronic illness prevention. New York, NY: Springer. CrossRef
Hofmann, W., Friese, M., & Wiers, R. (2008). Impulsive versus reflective influences on health behavior: A theoretical framework and empirical review. Health Psychology Review, 2, 111–137. CrossRef
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., & Howerter, A. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 49–100.
Shallice, T., & Burgess, P. (1993). Supervisory control of action and thought selection. In A. Baddeley & L. Weiskrantz (Eds.), Attention: Selection, awarness and control (pp. 171–187). Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
Stroop, J. R. (1992). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 15–23. CrossRef
Swinburn, B. A., Caterson, I., Seidell, J. C., & James, W. P. (2004). Diet, nutrition and the prevention of excess weight gain and obesity. Public Health Nutrition, 7, 123–146. PubMed
Vohs, K., & Baumeister, R. F. (2013). Handbook of self-regulation (second edition): Research, theory, and applications. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
- Executive control resources and snack food consumption in the presence of restraining versus facilitating cues
Peter A. Hall
- Springer US