Practice makes perfect: Restrained eaters' heightened control for food images.
Objective: Restrained eaters (RE) show behaviourally unregulated food intake, which is often explained by a deficit in inhibitory control. Despite evidence for general inhibitory deficits in RE, it remains unclear how the variety of (food) cues in our environment can influence cognitive control. Met...
| Publicado en: | European Eating Disorders Review Vol. 32; no. 1; pp. 90 - 99 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , |
| Formato: | research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Jan2024
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=174158573&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 174158573 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 10724133 BVM jtl: European Eating Disorders Review issn: 10724133 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Jan2024 vid: 32 iid: 1 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell place: Malden, Massachusetts artinfo: ui: 174158573 170072465 174158573 174158573 10.1002/erv.3023 174158573 ppf: 90 ppct: 9 formats: tig: atl: Practice makes perfect: Restrained eaters' heightened control for food images. aug: au: Ostende, Mechteld M. van den Hoek Schwarz, Ulrike Gawrilow, Caterina Kaup, Barbara Svaldi, Jennifer affil: University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany sug: subj: Restricted Diet Psychosocial Factors Control (Psychology) Evaluation Food Cues Methods Task Performance and Analysis Human Funding Source Secondary Analysis Descriptive Statistics Mental Processes ab: Objective: Restrained eaters (RE) show behaviourally unregulated food intake, which is often explained by a deficit in inhibitory control. Despite evidence for general inhibitory deficits in RE, it remains unclear how the variety of (food) cues in our environment can influence cognitive control. Method: In this re‐analysis, we explored the inhibitory capacity of RE and unrestrained eaters (URE) on a stop‐signal task with modal (pictures) and amodal (word) food and non‐food stimuli. Results: Although we did not find the expected inhibitory deficits in RE compared to URE, we found a significant Group × Modality × Stimulus Type interaction. This indicated that RE have relatively good inhibitory control for food, compared to non‐food modal cues, and that this relationship is reversed for amodal cues. Conclusions: Hence, we showed differential processing of information based on food‐specificity and presentation format in RE. The format of food cues is thus an important new avenue to understand how the food environment impedes those struggling with regulating their eating behaviour. Highlights: Restrained eaters, but not unrestrained eaters, differentially inhibit abstract and sensory cues.The nature of this relationship is contingent on the cues representing food or non‐food objects.Inhibition is relatively good for sensory food cues (pictures) compared to abstract food cues (words). pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|