School of Psychology, UNSW Australia, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
School of Psychology, UNSW Australia, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Appetite. 2017 Sep 1;116:511-517. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2017.05.044. Epub 2017 May 28.
Normative eating cues (portion size, social factors) have a powerful impact on people's food intake, but people often fail to acknowledge the influence of these cues, instead explaining their food intake in terms of internal (hunger) or sensory (taste) cues. This study examined whether the same biases apply when making predictions about how much food a person would eat. Participants (n = 364) read a series of vignettes describing an eating scenario and predicted how much food the target person would eat in each situation. Some scenarios consisted of a single eating cue (hunger, taste, or a normative cue) that would be expected to increase intake (e.g., high hunger) or decrease intake (e.g., a companion who eats very little). Other scenarios combined two cues that were in conflict with one another (e.g., high hunger + a companion who eats very little). In the cue-conflict scenarios involving an inhibitory internal/sensory cue (e.g., low hunger) with an augmenting normative cue (e.g., a companion who eats a lot), participants predicted a low level of food intake, suggesting a bias toward the internal/sensory cue. For scenarios involving an augmenting internal/sensory cue (e.g., high hunger) and an inhibitory normative cue (e.g., a companion who eats very little), participants predicted an intermediate level of food intake, suggesting that they were influenced by both the internal/sensory and normative cue. Overall, predictions about food intake tend to reflect a general bias toward internal/sensory cues, but also include normative cues when those cues are inhibitory. If people are systematically biased toward internal, sensory, and inhibitory cues, then they may underestimate how much food they or other people will eat in many situations, particularly when normative cues promoting eating are present.
规范性进食线索(份量大小、社会因素)对人们的食物摄入量有很大影响,但人们往往没有意识到这些线索的影响,而是根据内部(饥饿)或感官(味道)线索来解释自己的食物摄入量。本研究考察了当人们预测一个人会吃多少食物时,是否会出现同样的偏见。参与者(n=364)阅读了一系列描述进食场景的小插曲,并预测目标人在每种情况下会吃多少食物。一些场景只包含一个单一的进食线索(饥饿、味道或规范性线索),预计会增加摄入量(例如,饥饿感很强)或减少摄入量(例如,有一个吃得很少的同伴)。其他场景则将两个相互冲突的线索结合在一起(例如,饥饿感很强+一个吃得很少的同伴)。在涉及抑制性内部/感官线索(例如,饥饿感低)和增强性规范性线索(例如,吃得很多的同伴)的线索冲突场景中,参与者预测食物摄入量低,这表明他们偏向于内部/感官线索。对于涉及增强性内部/感官线索(例如,饥饿感很强)和抑制性规范性线索(例如,吃得很少的同伴)的场景,参与者预测食物摄入量处于中等水平,这表明他们受到内部/感官和规范性线索的双重影响。总的来说,对食物摄入量的预测往往反映出一种对内部/感官线索的普遍偏见,但当这些线索具有抑制作用时,也会包括规范性线索。如果人们系统地偏向于内部、感官和抑制性线索,那么他们可能会低估自己或其他人在许多情况下会吃多少食物,尤其是当存在促进进食的规范性线索时。