We are what we (think we) eat: The effect of expected satiety on subsequent calorie consumption

BROWN, Steven, DUNCAN, J., CRABTREE, D., POWELL, D., HUDSON, M. and ALLAN, J.L. (2020). We are what we (think we) eat: The effect of expected satiety on subsequent calorie consumption. Appetite, 152, p. 104717.

[img] PDF
Brown_EffectExpectedSatiety(AM).pdf - Accepted Version
Restricted to Repository staff only until 21 April 2021.
Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.

Download (369kB)
Official URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/...
Link to published version:: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.104717
Related URLs:

    Abstract

    Varying expected satiety (ES) for equi-calorie portions of different foods can affect subsequent feelings of hunger and fullness and alter consumption. To our knowledge, no study has manipulated ES for an equal portion of the same solid food, appetite has not been measured >3 h and studies have not consistently measure later consumption. It is also unclear whether changes in hunger, fullness or later consumption are related to a physiological response. The aims of this study were to use the same solid food, to measure participants' response over a 4-h inter-meal period, to measure later consumption and to assess whether any effect of ES was related to a physiological (i.e. total ghrelin) response. Using a within-subjects design, 26 healthy participants had their ES for omelettes manipulated experimentally, believing that a 3-egg omelette contained either 2 (small condition) or 4 (large condition) eggs. When ES was higher (large condition) participants ate significantly fewer calories at a lunchtime test meal (mean difference = 69 kcal [± 95% CI 4–136]) and consumed significantly fewer calories throughout the day (mean difference = 167 kcal [± 95% CI 26–309]). As expected, there was a main effect of time on hunger and fullness, but no main effect of ‘portion size’ (p > .05). There was also a significant interaction between time and portion size for hunger. There was no evidence for any significant differences being the result of changes in total ghrelin. Overall, the data suggest that ES for a solid food can be manipulated and that, when given at breakfast, having a higher ES for a meal reduces lunchtime and whole day caloric consumption.

    Item Type: Article
    Additional Information: ** Article version: AM ** Embargo end date: 31-12-9999 ** From Elsevier via Jisc Publications Router ** Licence for AM version of this article: This article is under embargo with an end date yet to be finalised. **Journal IDs: issn 01956663 **History: issue date 21-04-2020; accepted 15-04-2020
    Identification Number: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.104717
    Page Range: p. 104717
    SWORD Depositor: Colin Knott
    Depositing User: Colin Knott
    Date Deposited: 24 Apr 2020 10:05
    Last Modified: 16 Jul 2020 13:15
    URI: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/id/eprint/26165

    Actions (login required)

    View Item View Item

    Downloads

    Downloads per month over past year

    View more statistics