↓ Skip to main content

Psychobiological examination of liking and wanting for fat and sweet taste in trait binge eating females

Overview of attention for article published in Physiology & Behavior, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
169 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Psychobiological examination of liking and wanting for fat and sweet taste in trait binge eating females
Published in
Physiology & Behavior, March 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.03.019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle Dalton, Graham Finlayson

Abstract

The hedonic value of food has been conceptualised as a combination of how much a food is liked and how much a food is wanted in a given moment. These psychobiological constructs help to explain choices about which foods to eat and have a primary role in how much energy is consumed. Moreover the processes of liking and wanting for food are not always equivalent and may differ by degree according to the food in question, state of satiety, body composition and individual differences in dispositional eating behaviour traits. Here we report progress on the behavioural quantification of food hedonics in the laboratory setting through assessment of 'explicit liking' and 'implicit wanting' according to perceived fat content and/or sweet taste of common foods. We review recent experimental evidence examining the role of liking and wanting as features of 'trait binge eating' (assessed using the Binge Eating Scale)-a non-clinical psychometric marker for susceptibility to overeating and increased risk of weight gain. Our data show that trait binge eating can be viewed as an ecologically valid, behavioural phenotype of obesity, characterised by reliable psychological and anthropometric characteristics. Enhanced implicit wanting for sweet foods with high fat content is a psychobiological feature of susceptibility to overeating and offers a potential target for improving appetite control.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 169 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 168 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 27 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 14%
Student > Master 22 13%
Researcher 13 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 8%
Other 33 20%
Unknown 37 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 38 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 12%
Sports and Recreations 17 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 7%
Other 26 15%
Unknown 41 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 28 March 2014.
All research outputs
#22,756,649
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Physiology & Behavior
#4,603
of 5,536 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,815
of 237,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Physiology & Behavior
#72
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,536 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 237,397 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.