Center for Transformative Research on Health Behaviors, Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at VTC, 1 Riverside Circle, Roanoke, VA, 24016, USA.
School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo Jacobs, Buffalo, NY, USA.
J Behav Med. 2021 Apr;44(2):222-230. doi: 10.1007/s10865-020-00178-7. Epub 2020 Sep 28.
The present study sought to determine if episodic future thinking (EFT) can decrease delay discounting (DD) and demand for fast food under simulations of economic scarcity in adults at risk for diabetes (i.e., overweight/obese and with hemoglobin A1c values in, or approaching, the prediabetic range). Across two sessions, participants completed assessments of DD and food demand at baseline and while prompted to: (1) engage in either EFT or control episodic recent thinking, and (2) while reading a brief narrative describing either economic scarcity or neutral income conditions. Results showed that EFT significantly reduced DD, whereas the economic scarcity narrative significantly increased DD; no significant interaction between EFT and scarcity was observed. No significant effect of either EFT or scarcity was observed on food demand. We conclude that EFT decreases DD even when challenged by simulated economic scarcity in adults at risk for diabetes. The absence of a significant interaction between EFT and scarcity suggests that these variables operate independently to influence DD in opposing directions. Effects of EFT and economic scarcity on food demand require further study. The present study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03664726).
本研究旨在确定情景性未来思维(EFT)是否可以减少糖尿病风险成年人(即超重/肥胖且血红蛋白 A1c 值处于或接近糖尿病前期范围)在经济匮乏情景下的延迟折扣(DD)和对快餐的需求。在两个阶段中,参与者在基线和被提示时完成了 DD 和食物需求的评估:(1)进行 EFT 或控制情景性近期思维,以及(2)阅读描述经济匮乏或中性收入条件的简短叙述。结果表明,EFT 显著降低了 DD,而经济匮乏叙述显著增加了 DD;EFT 和匮乏之间没有观察到显著的相互作用。EFT 或匮乏对食物需求均无显著影响。我们得出结论,即使在糖尿病风险成年人面临模拟经济匮乏的情况下,EFT 也能降低 DD。EFT 和匮乏之间没有显著的相互作用表明这些变量独立地以相反的方向影响 DD。EFT 和经济匮乏对食物需求的影响需要进一步研究。本研究已在 clinicaltrials.gov 上注册(NCT03664726)。