↓ Skip to main content

The Possible Antecedents and Consequences of Matching of Food Intake: Examining the Role of Trait Self-Esteem and Interpersonal Closeness

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
The Possible Antecedents and Consequences of Matching of Food Intake: Examining the Role of Trait Self-Esteem and Interpersonal Closeness
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01920
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Hirata, Gerine M. A. Lodder, Ulrich Kühnen, Sonia Lippke, Roel C. J. Hermans

Abstract

Although there is evidence that people tend to match their intake to that of others, less is known about the motives underlying this effect. The current study, therefore, examined the relationship between self-esteem, a specific factor that has been related to the likelihood of social matching. Further, we examined the effects of food matching on interpersonal closeness among eating companions. The sample included 89 female dyads. All dyads had free access to palatable snack food during a 15 min interaction. For each dyad the matching score was calculated, as well as both individual's trait self-esteem scores and interpersonal closeness with their eating partner. The overall degree of matching within dyads was high, replicating the findings of previous research. No relationship, however, was found between trait self-esteem and the degree of matching. Furthermore, there was no effect of matching on perceived interpersonal closeness with or liking of the other person. These results suggest that self-esteem might not be a robust predictor of matching and that matching of food intake may not result in increased perceived interpersonal closeness or liking among eating partners.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 25%
Researcher 3 19%
Other 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 3 19%
Psychology 3 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 19%
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 December 2015.
All research outputs
#18,170,573
of 23,340,595 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#21,180
of 31,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,286
of 393,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#319
of 418 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,340,595 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,066 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 393,187 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 418 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.