Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26082744›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2015

Real-time sampling of reasons for hedonic food consumption: further validation of the Palatable Eating Motives Scale.

Mary M Boggiano, Lowell E Wenger, Bulent Turan, Mindy M Tatum, Maria D Sylvester, Phillip R Morgan, Kathryn E Morse, Emilee E Burgess

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Extending Expectancy Theory to Food Intake: Effect of a Simulated Fast-Food Restaurant on Highly and Minimally Processed Food Expectancies.Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2021
    Article
  18. Observational
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mary M BoggianoDepartment of Psychology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, AL, USA.
Lowell E WengerDepartment of Physics, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, AL, USA.
Bulent TuranDepartment of Psychology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, AL, USA.
Mindy M TatumDepartment of Psychology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, AL, USA.
Maria D SylvesterDepartment of Psychology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, AL, USA.
Phillip R MorganDepartment of Psychology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, AL, USA.
Kathryn E MorseDepartment of Psychology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, AL, USA.
Emilee E BurgessDepartment of Psychology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, AL, USA.
University of Alabama at Birmingham · US

Funding

University of Alabama at Birmingham's Diabetes Research CenterP30DK079626 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI Kirk Michael Habegger · 2013 to 2026
$19.5M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK079626
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Highly palatable foods play a salient role in obesity and binge-eating, and if habitually eaten to deal with intrinsic and extrinsic factors unrelated to metabolic need, may compromise adaptive coping and interpersonal skills. This study used event sampling methodology (ESM) to examine whether individuals who report eating palatable foods primarily to cope, to enhance reward, to be social, or to conform, as measured by the Palatable Eating Motives Scale (PEMS), actually eat these foods primarily for the motive(s) they report on the PEMS. Secondly this study examined if the previously reported ability of the PEMS Coping motive to predict BMI would replicate if the real-time (ESM-reported) coping motive was used to predict BMI. A total of 1691 palatable eating events were collected from 169 college students over 4 days. Each event included the day, time, and types of tasty foods or drinks consumed followed by a survey that included an abbreviated version of the PEMS, hunger as an additional possible motive, and a question assessing general perceived stress during the eating event. Two-levels mixed modeling confirmed that ESM-reported motives correlated most strongly with their respective PEMS motives and that all were negatively associated with eating for hunger. While stress surrounding the eating event was strongly associated with the ESM-coping motive, its inclusion in the model as a predictor of this motive did not abolish the significant association between ESM and PEMS Coping scores. Regression models confirmed that scores on the ESM-coping motive predicted BMI. These findings provide ecological validity for the PEMS to identify true-to-life motives for consuming palatable foods. This further adds to the utility of the PEMS in individualizing, and hence improving, treatment strategies for obesity, binge-eating, dietary nutrition, coping, reward acquisition, and psychosocial skills.

Indexed as

copingeating in absence of hungeremotional eatingexternal factorsmotivationobesityovereatingstress

Identifiers

PMID26082744
PMCPMC4450168
OpenAlexW1496315815

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.