ArticleFrontiers in psychology2016
The Environment Makes a Difference: The Impact of Explicit and Implicit Attitudes as Precursors in Different Food Choice Tasks.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Do Conventional Meat-Purchase Motivations Predict Acceptance of Cultured Meat? A National Study Among Polish Consumers.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Multifaceted Explanation of the Predisposition to Buy Organic Food.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Boosting healthy food choices by meal colour variety: results from two experiments and a just-in-time Ecological Momentary Intervention.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Mixed deep learning and natural language processing method for fake-food image recognition and standardization to help automated dietary assessment.Public health nutrition · 2019Article
- Do hedonic- versus nutrition-based attitudes toward food predict food choices? a cross-sectional study of 6- to 11-year-olds.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies show that implicit and explicit attitudes influence food choice. However, precursors of food choice often are investigated using tasks offering a very limited number of options despite the comparably complex environment surrounding real life food choice. In the present study, we investigated how the assortment impacts the relationship between implicit and explicit attitudes and food choice (confectionery and fruit), assuming that a more complex choice architecture is more taxing on cognitive resources. Specifically, a binary and a multiple option choice task based on the same stimulus set (fake food items) were presented to ninety-seven participants. Path modeling revealed that both explicit and implicit attitudes were associated with relative food choice (confectionery vs. fruit) in both tasks. In the binary option choice task, both explicit and implicit attitudes were significant precursors of food choice, with explicit attitudes having a greater impact. Conversely, in the multiple option choice task, the additive impact of explicit and implicit attitudes was qualified by an interaction indicating that, even if explicit and implicit attitudes toward confectionery were inconsistent, more confectionery was chosen than fruit if either was positive. This compensatory 'one is sufficient'-effect indicates that the structure of the choice environment modulates the relationship between attitudes and choice. The study highlights that environmental constraints, such as the number of choice options, are an important boundary condition that need to be included when investigating the relationship between psychological precursors and behavior.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.