Article

"Split them!" smaller item sizes of cookies lead to a decrease in energy intake in children.

Social Psychology Unit, Free University of Brussels, Bruxelles, Belgium.
Journal of nutrition education and behavior (Impact Factor: 1.36). 03/2012; 44(3):251-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jneb.2011.07.007
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Examine the influence of altering the size of snack food (ie, small vs large cookies) on short-term energy intake.
First- and sixth-graders (n = 77) participated in a between-subjects experimental design. All participants were offered the same gram weight of cookies during an afternoon tea at their school. For half of the participants, food was cut in 2 to make the small item size. Food intake (number of cookies, gram weight, and energy intake) was examined using ANOVA.
Decreasing the item size of food led to a decrease of 25% in gram weight intake, corresponding to 68 kcal. Appetitive ratings and subject and food characteristics had no moderating effect.
Reducing the item size of food could prove a useful dietary prevention strategy based on decreased consumption, aimed at countering obesity-promoting eating behaviors favored by the easy availability of large food portions.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
101 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to investigate the associations between proxy-reported energy intake, daily food intake and energy density of foods and body mass index (BMI) z-score in 2-9-year-old European children. From 16,225 children who participated in the identification and prevention of dietary- and lifestyle-induced health effects in children and infants (IDEFICS) baseline examination, 9,782 children with 24-h proxy dietary information and complete covariate information were included in the analysis. Participating children were classified according to adapted Goldberg cutoffs: underreports, plausible energy reports and overreports. Energy intake, daily food intake and energy density of foods excluding noncaloric beverages were calculated for all eating occasions. Effect of energy intake, daily food intake and energy density of foods on BMI z-score was investigated using multilevel regression models in the full sample and subsample of plausible energy reports. Exposure variables were included separately; daily food intake and energy intake were addressed in a combined model to check for interactions. In the group of plausible energy reports (N = 8,544), energy intake and daily food intake were significantly positively associated with BMI z-score. Energy density of foods was not associated with BMI z-score. In the model including energy intake, food intake and an interaction term, only energy intake showed a significantly positive effect on BMI z-score. In the full sample (N = 9,782), only energy intake was significantly but negatively associated with BMI z-score. Proxy-reporters are subject to misreporting, especially for children in the higher BMI levels. Energy intake is a more important predictor of unhealthy weight development in children than daily food intake.
    European Journal of Nutrition 09/2013; · 3.13 Impact Factor
  • Journal of nutrition education and behavior 07/2012; 44(4):281. · 1.36 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: People consistently over-eat when served a large compared to a small (appropriate) portion of food. However, the mechanism underlying this so-called portion size effect is not well understood. We argue that the process of anchoring and adjustment naturally describes this effect, such that the size of a presented portion works as an anchor that strongly influences consumption. The classical anchoring and adjustment paradigm was applied to six hypothetical eating situations. Participants were asked to imagine being served either a small or a large portion of food (i.e., low and high anchor) and to indicate whether they would consume more or less than this amount. Then, they indicated how much they would eat. These estimates were compared to a no-anchor condition where participants did not imagine a specific portion size but only indicated how much they would eat. In addition, half of participants in the anchoring conditions received a discounting instruction stating that the portion size they had been asked to imagine was randomly selected and thus not informative for their consumption estimate. As expected, participants who imagined to be served larger portions estimated to consume significantly more food than participants in the no-anchor condition, and participants who imagined to be served smaller portions estimated to consume significantly less food than participants in the no-anchor condition. The discounting manipulation did not reduce this effect of the anchors. We suggest that the process of anchoring and adjustment may provide a useful framework to understand the portion size effect and we discuss implications of this perspective.
    Appetite 06/2014; · 2.54 Impact Factor