Some individuals may have an addictive-like response to certain foods, possibly contributing to problematic eating. Highly processed foods, with added fats and/or refined carbohydrates, are suggested to be most associated with addictive-like eating. The incentive sensitization theory suggests that wanting (e.g. craving) may drive compulsive drug use rather than liking (e.g. enjoyment), but it is unknown whether highly processed foods elicit similar wanting and liking patterns as drugs of abuse, or whether individual differences exist. The current study examines the association of highly processed foods with craving and liking, and whether these relationships differ by food addiction symptomology, cognitive restraint, or body mass index (BMI). Participants (n = 216) reported craving and liking for 35 foods and completed the Yale Food Addiction Scale (YFAS) and Three Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ). Highly processed foods were craved more overall. Craving of highly processed foods was predicted negatively by restraint and positively by YFAS score. Liking of highly processed foods was predicted negatively by restraint and positively by BMI. In conclusion, craving and liking appear distinct with respect to highly processed foods, and may be influenced by addictive-like eating, cognitive restraint, and BMI. This suggests that the incentive sensitization framework may also be relevant for problematic food consumption, especially for individuals reporting food addiction symptoms.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 29 December 2025.
All research outputs
#2,338,558
of 32,521,757 outputs
Outputs from Appetite
#1,260
of 5,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,900
of 328,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Appetite
#23
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,521,757 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,422 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
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 328,132 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
