↓ Skip to main content

Effects of Imagined Consumption and Simulated Eating Movements on Food Intake: Thoughts about Food Are Not Always of Advantage

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Effects of Imagined Consumption and Simulated Eating Movements on Food Intake: Thoughts about Food Are Not Always of Advantage
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01691
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simona Haasova, Botond Elekes, Benjamin Missbach, Arnd Florack

Abstract

Imagined food consumption is a method of elaborately imagining oneself eating a specific food that, when repeated 30 times, has been shown to decrease subsequent intake of the same food. The technique relies on a memory-based habituation process when behavioral and motivational responses to a stimulus decrease after its repeated presentation. Thus, repeatedly imagining food consumption leads to food-specific habituation effects. Large numbers of imagined consumption repetitions are effortful and time consuming and can be problematic when applied in interventions with the goal of reducing food intake. In the present study, we assessed the efficacy of the technique at smaller numbers of repetitions while testing motor simulation as a potential facilitator of the habituation-based consumption-reduction effect. 147 participants imagined eating chocolate pudding 15 or 3 consecutive times and simultaneously performed either facilitating or not-facilitating eating movements. Results showed that participants who imagined eating the chocolate pudding 15 times (M15 = 178.20, SD15 = 68.08) ate more of the pudding than those who imagined consuming it 3 times (M3 = 150.73, SD3 = 73.31). The nature of the motor movements that were performed did not impact this effect. The data suggest that the imagined food consumption technique can result in an unexpected increase in food consumption, when smaller numbers of imagination repetitions are performed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 28%
Student > Master 8 28%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 3%
Researcher 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 28%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Engineering 2 7%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 8 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 April 2019.
All research outputs
#6,152,680
of 25,248,299 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,705
of 34,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,333
of 321,375 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#169
of 455 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,248,299 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,115 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 321,375 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 455 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.