Abstract
Objective: Dietary restraint is a common, yet controversial practice to tackle overweight. Yet, despite good intentions to reduce food intake, most restraint-based diets fail to produce long term weight loss. A better understanding of the naturalistic course of daily dieting intentions and their effectiveness in guiding subsequent eating behavior are therefore needed. Method: In two studies, participants (n = 49 and n = 59)reported both their state intention to restrict eating on the next day, as well as their actual restriction on that day via smartphone-based evening reports of 12 and 10 days, respectively. Intention-behavior gap scores were calculated as differences between intention at t1 (e.g. evening intention Monday for restriction Tuesday)and restriction at t2 (evening report of actual restraint on Tuesday). Restriction-related trait questionnaires served as predictors of general intention or restriction level, whereas several trait-level disinhibiting eating style questionnaires served as predictors for intention-behavior gaps (difference scores). Results: Daily intentions to restrict were rated higher than the daily actual restrictive behavior. Participants with higher scores on restriction-related questionnaires (restrained eating, dieting, lower intuitive eating)showed higher levels of daily state intention and restriction. Larger state intention-behavior gaps, by contrast, were seen in participants scoring high on trait-level disinhibiting eating styles (emotional eating, stress eating and food craving). Discussion: The results point to potential risk factors of diet failure in everyday life: emotional, stress eating, and food craving are disinhibiting traits that seem to increase intention-behavior gaps. These findings can inform individualized weight-loss interventions: individuals with disinhibiting traits might need additional guidance to avoid potentially frustrating diet failures.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 10-18 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Appetite |
| Volume | 140 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Sep 1 2019 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Psychology(all)
- Nutrition and Dietetics
Cite this
}
“I will fast … tomorrow” : Intentions to restrict eating and actual restriction in daily life and their person-level predictors. / Reichenberger, Julia; Smyth, Joshua Morrison; Kuppens, Peter; Blechert, Jens.
In: Appetite, Vol. 140, 01.09.2019, p. 10-18.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - “I will fast … tomorrow”
T2 - Intentions to restrict eating and actual restriction in daily life and their person-level predictors
AU - Reichenberger, Julia
AU - Smyth, Joshua Morrison
AU - Kuppens, Peter
AU - Blechert, Jens
PY - 2019/9/1
Y1 - 2019/9/1
N2 - Objective: Dietary restraint is a common, yet controversial practice to tackle overweight. Yet, despite good intentions to reduce food intake, most restraint-based diets fail to produce long term weight loss. A better understanding of the naturalistic course of daily dieting intentions and their effectiveness in guiding subsequent eating behavior are therefore needed. Method: In two studies, participants (n = 49 and n = 59)reported both their state intention to restrict eating on the next day, as well as their actual restriction on that day via smartphone-based evening reports of 12 and 10 days, respectively. Intention-behavior gap scores were calculated as differences between intention at t1 (e.g. evening intention Monday for restriction Tuesday)and restriction at t2 (evening report of actual restraint on Tuesday). Restriction-related trait questionnaires served as predictors of general intention or restriction level, whereas several trait-level disinhibiting eating style questionnaires served as predictors for intention-behavior gaps (difference scores). Results: Daily intentions to restrict were rated higher than the daily actual restrictive behavior. Participants with higher scores on restriction-related questionnaires (restrained eating, dieting, lower intuitive eating)showed higher levels of daily state intention and restriction. Larger state intention-behavior gaps, by contrast, were seen in participants scoring high on trait-level disinhibiting eating styles (emotional eating, stress eating and food craving). Discussion: The results point to potential risk factors of diet failure in everyday life: emotional, stress eating, and food craving are disinhibiting traits that seem to increase intention-behavior gaps. These findings can inform individualized weight-loss interventions: individuals with disinhibiting traits might need additional guidance to avoid potentially frustrating diet failures.
AB - Objective: Dietary restraint is a common, yet controversial practice to tackle overweight. Yet, despite good intentions to reduce food intake, most restraint-based diets fail to produce long term weight loss. A better understanding of the naturalistic course of daily dieting intentions and their effectiveness in guiding subsequent eating behavior are therefore needed. Method: In two studies, participants (n = 49 and n = 59)reported both their state intention to restrict eating on the next day, as well as their actual restriction on that day via smartphone-based evening reports of 12 and 10 days, respectively. Intention-behavior gap scores were calculated as differences between intention at t1 (e.g. evening intention Monday for restriction Tuesday)and restriction at t2 (evening report of actual restraint on Tuesday). Restriction-related trait questionnaires served as predictors of general intention or restriction level, whereas several trait-level disinhibiting eating style questionnaires served as predictors for intention-behavior gaps (difference scores). Results: Daily intentions to restrict were rated higher than the daily actual restrictive behavior. Participants with higher scores on restriction-related questionnaires (restrained eating, dieting, lower intuitive eating)showed higher levels of daily state intention and restriction. Larger state intention-behavior gaps, by contrast, were seen in participants scoring high on trait-level disinhibiting eating styles (emotional eating, stress eating and food craving). Discussion: The results point to potential risk factors of diet failure in everyday life: emotional, stress eating, and food craving are disinhibiting traits that seem to increase intention-behavior gaps. These findings can inform individualized weight-loss interventions: individuals with disinhibiting traits might need additional guidance to avoid potentially frustrating diet failures.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065134958&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85065134958&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.appet.2019.04.019
DO - 10.1016/j.appet.2019.04.019
M3 - Article
C2 - 31039371
AN - SCOPUS:85065134958
VL - 140
SP - 10
EP - 18
JO - Appetite
JF - Appetite
SN - 0195-6663
ER -