'Also happy with this environment?' is the question posed by the Dutch Nutrition Center in their new campaign. The video of this campaign is definitely worth watching.
Many children have poor eating habits which may lead to overweight and obesity. Children are constantly bombarded with unhealthy, high-caloric snacks and meals. As a result, children nowadays live in a so-called 'toxic food environment', a term invented by obesity researcher Kelly Brownell.
Successful obesity awareness campaigns require careful consideration of the target group and a key relevant message. On the one hand, they need to make parents aware of the seriousness of the problem. On the other hand, they need to provide useful information and not stigmatize or shame overweight children. This is not simple, as shown by a failed and controversial US childhood obesity campaign.
I particularly like the final scene of the video in which Lukas refuses the healthy meal cooked by his parents. It is a very familiar scene for many parents, including myself. Have a look yourself!
August 13, 2012
August 08, 2012
Just a bite or the full portion size? Dramatically smaller snack portion sizes satisfy hunger and cravings
A key reason we are getting overweight is because we eat too large portion sizes of food. But is this overeating giving us more satisfaction? Could eating smaller portions be similarly effective in decreasing food cravings or feelings of hunger as larger portions? That was the key question in the study that I conducted with Mitsuru Shimizu and Brian Wansink while visiting the Food and Brand lab. The paper is now published in Food Quality and Preference (see also full-text paper).
Results show that although providing larger food portions increased snack calorie intake by 77% (103 calories), after 15 minutes, they do not reduce hunger or cravings any more than smaller portions. In other words, after 15 minutes, when all food was out of sight, everyone was equally happy.
A typical snack in the US contains about 264 calories (see Piernas and Popkin, 2010). This amount closely resembles the total calories consumed in the large portion size condition in our study (about 237 calories). Nevertheless, although participants in the small portion size condition ate considerably less (about 134 calories, which is about 51% of what people typically snack), they were equally tempted by the snacks. This shows that whereas large portions tend to increase food intake, smaller portions may make you equally satisfied.
How to stop eating when you are craving a food? One way is to make sure that there is less food in front of you in the first place. That is not simple. Large food portions are common in supermarkets, restaurants and even at home. Portion sizes of many foods have increased during the last decades and we are getting used to it. For example, snack foods and beverages are offered in increasingly large packages. Although many consumers find 'value for money' important, it would be better to stop the emphasis of getting more food for you money. Smaller portion sizes can help you limit the amount of food you eat.
We presented 104 participants with either a small portion of three commonly craved snacks - chocolate, potato chips and apple pie - or substantial larger portions of the same snacks. For example, the small portion of chocolate was 10 grams, while the large portion was 100 grams. Feelings of hunger and craving were assessed just before participants started with the taste test, immediately after the taste test and about 15 minutes later. Secretly, we also measured how much participants ate. Results show that although providing larger food portions increased snack calorie intake by 77% (103 calories), after 15 minutes, they do not reduce hunger or cravings any more than smaller portions. In other words, after 15 minutes, when all food was out of sight, everyone was equally happy.
A typical snack in the US contains about 264 calories (see Piernas and Popkin, 2010). This amount closely resembles the total calories consumed in the large portion size condition in our study (about 237 calories). Nevertheless, although participants in the small portion size condition ate considerably less (about 134 calories, which is about 51% of what people typically snack), they were equally tempted by the snacks. This shows that whereas large portions tend to increase food intake, smaller portions may make you equally satisfied.
 |
| Going for the large portion size of their favourite food |
How to stop eating when you are craving a food? One way is to make sure that there is less food in front of you in the first place. That is not simple. Large food portions are common in supermarkets, restaurants and even at home. Portion sizes of many foods have increased during the last decades and we are getting used to it. For example, snack foods and beverages are offered in increasingly large packages. Although many consumers find 'value for money' important, it would be better to stop the emphasis of getting more food for you money. Smaller portion sizes can help you limit the amount of food you eat.
July 18, 2012
3 surprising insights on how food cravings relate to other desires in everyday life
What is harder to resist? Checking your Twitter or Facebook account at work or eating a delicious, but fattening snack when you try to watch your calories? Both are inner conflicts, best described as 'I really want to do this, but I should not'.
In many food studies it is assumed that people have conflicting feelings when being confronted with tempting foods. But is that really the case in everyday life? What type of cravings are felt most strongly? And if people do crave foods, how often are they trying to resist their desire?
Wilhelm Hofmann, Kathlees Vohs and Roy Baummeister recently tried to answer these questions in their Everyday Temptation Study. They gave BlackBerrys to 205 participants and contacted them on 7 random times per day for one week. When they were contacted, they had to indicate what type of desire they experienced within the last 30 minutes, how conflicted they felt about this desire, whether they tried to resist the desire and how successful they were in this. The study included all types of everyday desires, including the desire to eat, drink, have sex, sleep, spend money and use media (such as social media). Here are 3 insights that I found most surprising.
1) Food is not the hardest desire to resist
People feel some desire about half the time they are awake. In hours, this is about eight hours a day. Almost half of those desires are conflicting at least somewhat with other goals in life.
Interestingly, food is not the hardest desire to resist. It is much more difficult to fight the desire for sleep and fun leisure activitities (such as checking Facebook). These two were considered to be the hardest to resist. Only 23% of all conflicting desires go against some health goals (for example healthy eating or exercise). The majority of reported inner conflicts were related to goals such as saving money, achievements at work or study, social appearance and efficient time use.
In other words, it is harder to resist impulses to spend money, participate in sports, use (social) media and smoke than it is to resist eating.
2) We spend three hours a day resisting desires
The majority of desires in everyday life are not resisted. We have to eat anyway, so why trying to resist it? When people do try to resist them, they are quite successful in it; in 83% of all inner conflicts, they succeed to not give in. Still, in 17% of all occasions, people do give in. They particularly fail to resist checking e-mail, Facebook, Twitter of other social media when they do not want to do that.
3) Stop resisting the numerous cravings throughout a day
Besides that we spend about three hours per day resisting desires, we also spend half an hour giving in to desires that we initially resisted. The more often you try to resist a desire, the less willpower is left at the end of the day and the more likely it is that you go for the 'forbidden' food. This confirms the 'muscle model' of willpower, which states that willpower is like a muscle that needs refuel.
So, do not replete your willpower, stop reading this blog post and go back to work.
Hofmann W, Baumeister RF, Förster G, & Vohs KD (2012). Everyday temptations: an experience sampling study of desire, conflict, and self-control. Journal of personality and social psychology, 102 (6), 1318-35 PMID: 22149456
In many food studies it is assumed that people have conflicting feelings when being confronted with tempting foods. But is that really the case in everyday life? What type of cravings are felt most strongly? And if people do crave foods, how often are they trying to resist their desire?
Wilhelm Hofmann, Kathlees Vohs and Roy Baummeister recently tried to answer these questions in their Everyday Temptation Study. They gave BlackBerrys to 205 participants and contacted them on 7 random times per day for one week. When they were contacted, they had to indicate what type of desire they experienced within the last 30 minutes, how conflicted they felt about this desire, whether they tried to resist the desire and how successful they were in this. The study included all types of everyday desires, including the desire to eat, drink, have sex, sleep, spend money and use media (such as social media). Here are 3 insights that I found most surprising.
1) Food is not the hardest desire to resist
People feel some desire about half the time they are awake. In hours, this is about eight hours a day. Almost half of those desires are conflicting at least somewhat with other goals in life.
Interestingly, food is not the hardest desire to resist. It is much more difficult to fight the desire for sleep and fun leisure activitities (such as checking Facebook). These two were considered to be the hardest to resist. Only 23% of all conflicting desires go against some health goals (for example healthy eating or exercise). The majority of reported inner conflicts were related to goals such as saving money, achievements at work or study, social appearance and efficient time use.
In other words, it is harder to resist impulses to spend money, participate in sports, use (social) media and smoke than it is to resist eating.
2) We spend three hours a day resisting desires
The majority of desires in everyday life are not resisted. We have to eat anyway, so why trying to resist it? When people do try to resist them, they are quite successful in it; in 83% of all inner conflicts, they succeed to not give in. Still, in 17% of all occasions, people do give in. They particularly fail to resist checking e-mail, Facebook, Twitter of other social media when they do not want to do that.
3) Stop resisting the numerous cravings throughout a day
Besides that we spend about three hours per day resisting desires, we also spend half an hour giving in to desires that we initially resisted. The more often you try to resist a desire, the less willpower is left at the end of the day and the more likely it is that you go for the 'forbidden' food. This confirms the 'muscle model' of willpower, which states that willpower is like a muscle that needs refuel.
So, do not replete your willpower, stop reading this blog post and go back to work.
 |
| What is harder to resist; Twitter and Facebook at work or the temptation of an unhealthy snack? |
Hofmann W, Baumeister RF, Förster G, & Vohs KD (2012). Everyday temptations: an experience sampling study of desire, conflict, and self-control. Journal of personality and social psychology, 102 (6), 1318-35 PMID: 22149456
July 04, 2012
Wanting to eat healthier, but little healthy foods sold at McDonalds
Most fast food restaurants do not share their sales data of healthy foods, but that did not stop Lyndall Wellard and colleagues to find out how many healthy items are actually sold at the biggest fast food chain in the world. They observed what people bought at 20 McDonalds restaurants in Australia. Of the 1449 meal purchases observed, only 1% could be considered healthy, 65% were unhealthy and 34% were take-away (so impossible to determine whether food is healthy or not).
According to a survey among Americans, 47% said they wanted restaurants to offer healthier items like salads. Even 23% said they tend to order those foods. Apparently many consumers like to have these items on the menu. Maybe as a license to indulge? Research of Wilcox and colleagues already showed that adding a salad or fruit to the menu makes you more likely to order fries. And to make it worse: consumers also tend to believe that adding a healthy item to a meal magically decreases the number of calories of the total meal.
In my previous blog post, I discussed the essay of Marion Nestle and David Stuckler on the influence of large food companies on public health. They are right, healthier foods are inherently less profitable. At least when eating out, most consumers seem to just want to indulge (without feeling too guilty).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
