Hunger is an everyday motivational state, which biases cognition to detect food. Although evidence exists on how hunger affects basic attentional and mnemonic processes, less is known about how motivational drive for food modulates higher cognition. We aimed to investigate the effects of food deprivation on proactive interference resolution, in the presence and absence of food. Normal-weight participants performed a recency probes paradigm providing an experimental block with food and object stimuli as well as a control block with object stimuli only, in a fasted and a sated state. Results showed that the interaction of shifts in nutritional state with the perception of food cues evoked an altered resolution of proactive interference. Satiety led to impaired performance, whereas a hungry state resulted in strengthened resistance to proactive interference and lying in between, the control block presenting neutral objects remained unaffected by nutritional state manipulation. Additionally, a further increase in proactive interference resolution occurred when the conflicting probe depicted food compared to non-food objects. We conclude that when exposed to food, hunger initiates biased competition of active memory representations in favor of prioritized source information at cost of familiar, but irrelevant information. The implications of these findings are discussed in terms of an arousal-biased competition in working memory.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 October 2016.
All research outputs
#15,982,793
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Appetite
#3,461
of 4,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,391
of 324,018 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Appetite
#85
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,785 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.0. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,018 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
