Article

It Takes Some Effort: How Minimal Physical Effort Reduces Consumption Volume.

Bern University of Applied Sciences, HAFL, Food Science & Management, Laenggasse 85, CH-3052 Zollikofen, Switzerland.; ETH Zurich, Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED), Consumer Behavior, Universitaetstrasse 22, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland.. Electronic address: .
Appetite (Impact Factor: 2.54). 08/2013; DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2013.07.014
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Plenty of studies have demonstrated that effort influences food choice. However, few have been conducted to analyze the effect of effort on consumption volume. Moreover, the few studies that have measured consumption volume all have strong limitations. The goal of the present paper is to disentangle confounding variables in earlier research and to rule out various alternative explanations. In a tasting setting focusing on snacking behavior, either unwrapping a food product or grabbing it with sugar tongs was enough to significantly reduce consumption, regardless of whether an unhealthy or healthy food item was used. Hardly any cognitive resources seem to be necessary for the effect to occur, as cognitive load did not affect the findings. In light of obesity being a pressing concern, these findings might be valuable for individuals as well as for the food industry.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
121 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Offered aluminum-foil-wrapped or unwrapped food (chocolates and cashews) to 62 obese and 64 normal undergraduates to investigate the effects of past experience on the willingness to work for food. The results show that neither obesity nor the unwrapping manipulation had an effect on the consumption of chocolates. Wrapping, however, produced a significant effect on cashew consumption-obese Ss ate fewer cashews if they were wrapped, while normal Ss ate about the same number of wrapped and unwrapped cashews. It appears that the willingness to work for food in obese humans depends on training and testing conditions. Obese humans are less motivated only when they must work harder than they are accustomed to obtain food. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
    Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 04/1974; 86(3):503-8. · 1.96 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Examined similarities between experimental findings with obese human Ss and lesioned hyperphagic rats. In comparison to normals, obese Ss (a) eat more of a good- and less of a bad-tasting food; (b) eat fewer meals/day, eat more/meal, and eat more rapidly; (c) react more emotionally; (d) eat more when food is easy to procure and less when it is difficult; (e) do not regulate food consumption when preloaded with solids, but do when preloaded with liquids; and (f) are less active. N. Mrosovosky's theory that the ventromedial hypothalamus is functionally quiescent in obese Ss is discussed. The function of the hypothalamus is examined. It is hypothesized that obese Ss are stimulus-bound. Experiments reveal that obese Ss (a) do better on recall tests, (b) respond faster with fewer errors on complex RT tasks, (c) are more distractible, and (d) work harder for food when food cues are prominent. Reexamining the activity levels of Ss, it was found that beyond a given stimulus intensity, Ss are more reactive than normals. Difficulties with the comparison and formulation are noted. (38 ref.)
    American Psychologist 03/1971; 26(2):129-44. · 6.87 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Obese human subjects who were offered three sandwiches ate more than normal subjects. When only one sandwich was offered and additional sandwiches were available but out of sight, the obese subjects ate less than normal subjects. This resuclt is discussed in terms of the types of cues that motivate eating for obese versus normal individuals.
    Science 04/1968; 159(3820):1254-5. · 31.03 Impact Factor