Elsevier

Appetite

Volume 72, 1 January 2014, Pages 66-72
Appetite

Research report
Profiling motives behind hedonic eating. Preliminary validation of the Palatable Eating Motives Scale

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2013.09.016Get rights and content

Highlights

  • A new “Palatable Eating Motives Scale” (PEMS) assesses reasons behind tasty food intake.

  • Preliminary validation psychometric statistics are presented.

  • Factor analysis yielded the four subscales: Social, Coping, Enhancement, and Conformity.

  • Coping scores independently contributed to variance in BMI.

  • Once further validated, the PEMS may be of practical use in obesity treatments.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to validate a new scale designed to measure individual motives for eating tasty foods and determine if any specific motive(s) are associated with obesity. The “Palatable Eating Motives Scale” (PEMS) is a self-report measure adapted from the Drinking Motives Questionnaire Revised (DMQ-R). N = 150 racially-diverse college students (mean age: 24.4, BMI: 16–51 kg/m2) were administered the PEMS along with the Binge-Eating Scale (BES) and the Yale Food Addiction Scale (YFAS) to test for convergent and incremental validity and the Sensitivity to Punishment and Reward Questionnaire (SPSRQ) for discriminant validity. The PEMS identified four motives for eating tasty food, the same ones found with the DMQ-R for alcohol intake: Social, Conformity, Enhancement, and Coping motives. The scales had good convergent validity with BES and YFAS scores but discriminated from the broader motivational constructs of inhibition and activation measured by the SPSRQ. Of the PEMS motives, Coping (eating tasty food to deal with problems and negative feelings) accounted for unique variance in BMI, and added to variance in BMI contributed by BES scores, showing incremental validity. YFAS scores did not contribute to BMI after controlling for binge-eating. Coping subscale scores were also significantly higher (p < 0.001) among the severely obese (BMI > 40). Motives behind palatable food intake are not homogenous and should be considered in personalized weight-loss strategies in future studies. In normal weight individuals, knowing one’s dominant motive for eating tasty foods may help promote healthier food choices in times and places where they are most vulnerable to do otherwise.

Introduction

While progress has been made in our understanding of the environmental, genetic, and physiological contributors of obesity, the U.S. and global rates of this chronic condition remain high and are projected to escalate (Nguyen & El-Serag, 2010). Even when weight loss has been achieved, maintenance is a frequent problem (Douketis, Macie, Thabane, & Williamson, 2005). The role of hedonic- vs. metabolic- or homeostatic-driven eating in the development and maintenance of obesity has gained attention in the research literature. Hedonic eating generally describes eating that occurs in the absence of hunger or metabolic need and recruits neuroendocrine systems linked to reward vs. hunger and satiety (Berthoud, 2011, Ely et al., 2013, Glass et al., 1999). Hedonic eating is satisfied by the intake of highly palatable foods-foods that are typically made tasty by their higher fat, sugar, and salt content and hence also tend to be dense in calories. These properties and the great variety, abundance, and easy access to them in the current environment have rendered hedonic eating a significant contributor to overweight and obesity (Berthoud, 2011, Blundell and Finlayson, 2004, Erlanson-Albertsson, 2005, Johnson, 2013, Lowe and Butryn, 2007, Lutter and Nestler, 2009, Yeomans et al., 2004).

However, not everyone exposed to this ubiquitous palatable food environment has developed obesity. Animal models of individual differences in palatable food intake are available and clinical studies have suggested genetic and physiological markers that underlie individual differences in palatable food intake that may ultimately render some prone or resistant to obesity (Boggiano et al., 2007, Chandler et al., 2005, Cornier et al., 2013, Davis et al., 2011, Felsted et al., 2010, Fortuna, 2010, Lange et al., 2010, Wang et al., 2001). However, surprisingly little research has focused on individual reasons or motives for why people eat highly palatable foods.

Studies have linked common personality traits, behavioral responses, and neural mechanisms between hedonic eating and substance abuse (Benjamin and Wulfert, 2005, Davis et al., 2008, Fortuna, 2010, Holtz and Carroll, 2013, Jansen, 1998, Kolotkin et al., 1987, Lange et al., 2010, Lowe and Butryn, 2007, Sobik et al., 2005, Stice et al., 2012, Volkow et al., 2008). Hence, there may be common motives behind drinking alcohol and eating tasty foods. Indeed, individuals consume alcoholic beverages for various reasons from normative ones (e.g., to socialize) to less normative and even harmful ones (e.g., to cope with negative affect, which has been linked to the development of alcoholism) (Cooper, 1994). Similarly, some may eat tasty foods for normal or adaptive reasons (e.g., to celebrate an occasion) or for less adaptive ones (e.g., to cope with negative feelings and stress). It was the goal of this study to examine whether certain motives behind eating tasty foods are linked with obesity, similar to the link observed in the alcohol literature between certain drinking motives and alcohol abuse/dependence.

Knowing what various motives drive eating tasty food intake among individuals could lead to more personally tailored treatment strategies for the individual struggling with obesity. Furthermore, social psychology research has indicated that motives are integral in shaping behavior (Köpetz, Lejuez, Wiers, & Kruglanski, 2013). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to develop and validate a tool to identify individual motivations for eating tasty foods and to determine if certain motives would be associated with body mass index (BMI). To do this, we developed an original self-report scale adapted from the Drinking Motives Questionnaire Revised (DMQ-R) (Cooper, 1994, Cooper et al., 1992) by substituting “drinking alcohol” with “eating tasty foods and drinks”. We named this new scale the “Palatable Eating Motives Scale” (PEMS) and used it to identify unique motives for eating tasty foods and their effects on BMI.

The PEMS specifically instructed participants to think of times they have eaten tasty foods and drinks such as desserts, salty snacks, and fast food (see Appendix A). We chose to specifically measure motives behind consumption of these type of foods because (a) they are typical of foods chosen when eating for non-metabolic reasons (in the absence of hunger) or passively eating (Hill & Peters, 1998), (b) they are difficult to limit due to their greater palatability (Thomas, Doshi, Crosby, & Lowe, 2011), and (c) they are typically energy dense (Drewnowski, 1998), all factors that can facilitate weight gain (Astrup & Brand-Miller, 2012). Additionally, we chose to instruct participants to think of times they had “eaten” these foods instead of instructing them to think of times they had “overeaten” these foods. This was intended to avoid subjective definitions of overeating and to avoid excluding anyone who ate these foods in moderation. This way we could assess if certain eating motives were more associated with healthy body weight and others with overweight or obesity. Several other scales exist that measure aspects of food and food intake (Arnow et al., 1995, Gearhardt et al., 2009, Steptoe et al., 1995, van Strien et al., 1986). However the PEMS is unique from existing scales in that it probes motivations for consuming palatable foods (i.e., as a means to meet a certain end) rather than probing for “addiction” traits per se (Yale Food Addiction Scale; YFAS (Gearhardt et al., 2009) or the extent to which various emotions and cues trigger food intake, e.g., Emotional Eating Scale (Arnow et al., 1995), Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire (van Strien et al., 1986), or motives for consuming food in general, e.g., Food Choice Questionnaire (Steptoe et al., 1995) vs. palatable food specifically.

Binge-eating and the concept of food dependence or “food addiction” may be similar but distinct constructs from the motives measured by the PEMS. Therefore, we chose to also administer the YFAS and Binge Eating Scale or BES (Gormally, Black, Daston, & Rardin, 1982) to assess convergent and incremental validity of the PEMS. Tasty foods are often consumed for non-homeostatic reasons. The same is true of binge-eating as occurs in bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder (APA, 2000; Hetherington and Rolls, 1991, Waters et al., 2001). However, binge-eating is also accompanied by feelings of loss of control and eating specifically large quantities of food, not just palatable food, in a discrete period of time (APA, 2000). The concept of “food addiction” is purported to be characterized specifically by intake of palatable food, also for non-homoeostatic reasons, but is proposed to take on properties akin to those of substance abuse (Gearhardt et al., 2009). While the concept of food dependence shares some overlap with binge-eating symptoms such as loss of control, eating in large quantities, and experiencing distress, it is unique in its incorporation of tolerance and withdrawal symptoms (Gearhardt et al., 2009). Both binge-eating and food dependence have also been linked to increased risk of obesity (Bruce and Agras, 1992, Grucza et al., 2007, Meule et al., 2012, Stice et al., 2002). Therefore, in testing the association of the PEMS to BMI, it was additionally important to include the YFAS and BES in the study. Finally, the Sensitivity to Punishment Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire or SPSRQ (Torrubia, Ávila, Moltó, & Caseras, 2001) was also administered to probe broader motivational constructs of approach (via the Behavioral Activation System subscale or BAS) and avoidance (via the Behavioral Inhibition System subscale or BIS) and was used here to test for discriminant validity of the PEMS.

Section snippets

Participants

A total of 150 participants, n = 106 female, n = 44 male, college undergraduates were recruited from the Introductory Psychology course participant pool and were offered research participation credits or extra credit. Psychology students in more advanced courses could participate as one of several options for extra credit. Flyers were also posted on the UAB campus that offered a $10 Visa gift card for undergraduate students with a BMI > 24.9. This was done to boost the number of overweight students

Demographic and BMI distribution across the PEMS subscales

The mean age of the student sample was 24.4 (range 17–60), with a mean BMI of 26.3 kg/m2 (range 16.4–51.0). As shown in Table 1, sex and ethnicity were not associated with PEMS subscale scores. Age is not shown in the Table because it is a continuous variable (regression analysis later revealed an effect of age on the PEMS subscale scores). BMI was categorized for descriptive purposes in Table 1. As shown, the severely obese participants (BMI range 41.8–51.0), despite only 8 in the group, scored

Discussion

The goal of this study was to develop, and provide preliminary validation of the PEMS, a new tool to measure motivations to eat tasty foods. We also determined if the PEMS could account for any unique variability in BMI. Factor analysis successfully identified four motives (subscales) for the PEMS including Social, Conformity, Coping, and Enhancement motives. Cronbach’s alpha suggested good reliability of the four PEMS subscales. The four PEMS subscales had good convergent validity with

References (53)

  • R.A. Grucza et al.

    Prevalence and correlates of binge eating disorder in a community sample

    Comprehensive Psychiatry

    (2007)
  • N. Hauck-Filho et al.

    Confirmatory factor analysis of the Brazilian version of the Drinking Motives Questionnaire-Revised (DMQ-R)

    Addictive Behaviors

    (2012)
  • M.M. Hetherington et al.

    Eating behavior in eating disorders. Response to preloads

    Physiology & Behavior

    (1991)
  • A. Jansen

    A learning model of binge eating. Cue reactivity and cue exposure

    Behaviour Research and Therapy

    (1998)
  • A.W. Johnson

    Eating beyond metabolic need. How environmental cues influence feeding behavior

    Trends in Neuroscience

    (2013)
  • M.R. Lowe et al.

    Hedonic hunger. A new dimension of appetite?

    Physiology & Behavior

    (2007)
  • M. Lutter et al.

    Homeostatic and hedonic signals interact in the regulation of food intake

    Journal of Nutrition

    (2009)
  • D.M. Nguyen et al.

    The epidemiology of obesity

    Gastroenterology Clinics of North America

    (2010)
  • L. Sobik et al.

    Cue-elicited craving for food. A fresh approach to the study of binge eating

    Appetite

    (2005)
  • R. Torrubia et al.

    The Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire (SPSRQ) as a measure of Gray’s anxiety and impulsivity dimensions

    Personality and Individual Differences

    (2001)
  • G.J. Wang et al.

    Brain dopamine and obesity

    Lancet

    (2001)
  • A. Waters et al.

    Bulimics’ responses to food cravings. Is binge-eating a product of hunger or emotional state?

    Behaviour Research and Therapy

    (2001)
  • American Psychiatric Association

    Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders fourth edition text revision (DSM-IV-TR)

    (2000)
  • B. Arnow et al.

    The Emotional Eating Scale. The development of a measure to assess coping with negative affect by eating

    International Journal of Eating Disorders

    (1995)
  • M.M. Boggiano et al.

    High intake of palatable food predicts binge-eating characteristics independent of susceptibility to obesity. An animal model of lean vs. obese binge eating and obesity with and without binge-eating

    International Journal of Obesity

    (2007)
  • B. Bruce et al.

    Binge eating in females. A population-based investigation

    International Journal of Eating Disorders

    (1992)
  • Cited by (100)

    • Loneliness and preferences for palatable foods: The role of coping

      2023, Current Research in Behavioral Sciences
    • The role of eating expectancies and eating motives in the association between mood and loss-of-control eating: A national sample daily diary study

      2023, Appetite
      Citation Excerpt :

      Pleasure motives are positively reinforced, internally driven factors (Cooper, 1994), such as eating for a sense of reward and enjoyment (Cooper, 1994; Ferriter & Ray, 2011). Unlike coping motives, there is no readily apparent preliminary link regarding a potential role of pleasure motives between mood and LOCE, although individuals may seek out opportunities for reward or celebration through consumption of highly palatable foods (Burgess et al., 2014), which are the same types of foods that individuals are more likely to consume in an uncontrolled manner. However, this link has been found for other deleterious behaviors (e.g., substance use, see Stevenson et al., 2019).

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Acknowledgements: This study was supported by an internal UAB Psychology merit fund (MMB). Conflict of interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

    1

    Former name M.M. Hagan.

    View full text