↓ Skip to main content

Automatic Approach Tendencies toward High and Low Caloric Food in Restrained Eaters: Influence of Task-Relevance and Mood

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Automatic Approach Tendencies toward High and Low Caloric Food in Restrained Eaters: Influence of Task-Relevance and Mood
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00525
Pubmed ID
Authors

Renate A. M. Neimeijer, Anne Roefs, Brian D. Ostafin, Peter J. de Jong

Abstract

Objective: Although restrained eaters are motivated to control their weight by dieting, they are often unsuccessful in these attempts. Dual process models emphasize the importance of differentiating between controlled and automatic tendencies to approach food. This study investigated the hypothesis that heightened automatic approach tendencies in restrained eaters would be especially prominent in contexts where food is irrelevant for their current tasks. Additionally, we examined the influence of mood on the automatic tendency to approach food as a function of dietary restraint. Methods: An Affective Simon Task-manikin was administered to measure automatic approach tendencies where food is task-irrelevant, and a Stimulus Response Compatibility task (SRC) to measure automatic approach in contexts where food is task-relevant, in 92 female participants varying in dietary restraint. Prior to the task, sad, stressed, neutral, or positive mood was induced. Food intake was measured during a bogus taste task after the computer tasks. Results: Consistent with their diet goals, participants with a strong tendency to restrain their food intake showed a relatively weak approach bias toward food when food was task-relevant (SRC) and this effect was independent of mood. Restrained eaters showed a relatively strong approach bias toward food when food was task-irrelevant in the positive condition and a relatively weak approach in the sad mood. Conclusion: The weak approach bias in contexts where food is task-relevant may help high-restrained eaters to comply with their diet goal. However, the strong approach bias in contexts where food is task-irrelevant and when being in a positive mood may interfere with restrained eaters' goal of restricting food-intake.

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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 26%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Researcher 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 15 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 42%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 18 36%
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 11 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,413,129
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#24,302
of 30,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,218
of 310,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#501
of 558 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 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 30,112 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. 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 310,113 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 558 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.