Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Appetite. 2018 May 1;124:99-110. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2017.04.024. Epub 2017 Apr 23.
Not responding to food items in a go/no-go task can lead to devaluation of these food items, which may help people regulate their eating behavior. The Behavior Stimulus Interaction (BSI) theory explains this devaluation effect by assuming that inhibiting impulses triggered by appetitive foods elicits negative affect, which in turn devalues the food items. BSI theory further predicts that the devaluation effect will be stronger when food items are more appetitive and when individuals have low inhibition capacity. To test these hypotheses, we manipulated the appetitiveness of food items and measured individual inhibition capacity with the stop-signal task. Food items were consistently paired with either go or no-go cues, so that participants responded to go items and not to no-go items. Evaluations of these items were measured before and after go/no-go training. Across two preregistered experiments, we consistently found no-go foods were liked less after the training compared to both go foods and foods not used in the training. Unexpectedly, this devaluation effect occurred for both appetitive and less appetitive food items. Exploratory signal detection analyses suggest this latter finding might be explained by increased learning of stimulus-response contingencies for the less appetitive items when they are presented among appetitive items. Furthermore, the strength of devaluation did not consistently correlate with individual inhibition capacity, and Bayesian analyses combining data from both experiments provided moderate support for the null hypothesis. The current project demonstrated the devaluation effect induced by the go/no-go training, but failed to obtain further evidence for BSI theory. Since the devaluation effect was reliably obtained across experiments, the results do reinforce the notion that the go/no-go training is a promising tool to help people regulate their eating behavior.
在“go/no-go”任务中对食物无反应会导致这些食物的贬值,这可能有助于人们调节自己的饮食行为。行为刺激相互作用(BSI)理论通过假设抑制食欲食物引发的冲动会产生负面情绪,从而使食物贬值来解释这种贬值效应。BSI 理论进一步预测,当食物更有吸引力且个体抑制能力较低时,这种贬值效应会更强。为了检验这些假设,我们操纵了食物的吸引力,并使用停止信号任务来衡量个体的抑制能力。食物始终与“go”或“no-go”线索配对,因此参与者对“go”项目做出反应,而不对“no-go”项目做出反应。在 go/no-go 训练前后测量对这些项目的评价。在两个预先注册的实验中,我们一致发现,与“go”食物和未用于训练的食物相比,训练后“no-go”食物的喜好度降低。出乎意料的是,这种贬值效应发生在有吸引力和吸引力较低的食物上。探索性信号检测分析表明,当不太有吸引力的食物与有吸引力的食物一起呈现时,它们的刺激-反应关系的学习增加,可能解释了后一种发现。此外,贬值的强度与个体抑制能力并不一致相关,对两个实验数据进行的贝叶斯分析为零假设提供了中等程度的支持。本项目证明了 go/no-go 训练引起的贬值效应,但未能为 BSI 理论提供更多证据。由于在实验中可靠地获得了贬值效应,因此结果确实强化了这样一种观点,即 go/no-go 训练是帮助人们调节饮食行为的一种很有前途的工具。