Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27621720›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2016

Task-Based and Questionnaire Measures of Inhibitory Control Are Differentially Affected by Acute Food Restriction and by Motivationally Salient Food Stimuli in Healthy Adults.

Savani Bartholdy, Jiumu Cheng, Ulrike Schmidt, Iain C Campbell, Owen G O'Daly

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Hunger improves reinforcement-driven but not planned action.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Savani BartholdySection of Eating Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London London, UK.
Jiumu ChengDepartment of Neuroscience, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London London, UK.
Ulrike SchmidtSection of Eating Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London London, UK.
Iain C CampbellSection of Eating Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London London, UK.
Owen G O'DalyCentre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London London, UK.
King's College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adaptive eating behaviors are dependent on an interaction between motivational states (e.g., hunger) and the ability to control one's own behavior (inhibitory control). Indeed, behavioral paradigms are emerging that seek to train inhibitory control to improve eating behavior. However, inhibitory control is a multifaceted concept, and it is not yet clear how different types (e.g., reactive motor inhibition, proactive motor inhibition, reward-related inhibition) are affected by hunger. Such knowledge will provide insight into the contexts in which behavioral training paradigms would be most effective. The present study explored the impact of promoting a "need" state (hunger) together with motivationally salient distracting stimuli (food/non-food images) on inhibitory control in 46 healthy adults. Participants attended two study sessions, once after eating breakfast as usual and once after acute food restriction on the morning of the session. In each session, participants completed questionnaires on hunger, mood and inhibitory control, and undertook task-based measures of inhibitory control, and had physiological measurements (height, weight, and blood glucose) obtained by a researcher. Acute food restriction influenced task-based assessments but not questionnaire measures of inhibitory control, suggesting that hunger affects observable behavioral control but not self-reported inhibitory control. After acute food restriction, participants showed greater temporal discounting (devaluation of future rewards), and subjective hunger and these were inversely correlated with stop accuracy on the stop signal task. Finally, participants generally responded faster when food-related distractor images were presented, compared to non-food images, independent of state. This suggests that although food stimuli motivate approach behavior, stimulus relevance does not impact inhibitory control in healthy individuals, nor interact with motivational state. These findings may provide some explanation for poorer inhibitory control often reported in studies of individuals who practice restraint over eating.

Indexed as

fastedfedfoodinhibitory controltemporal discounting

Identifiers

PMID27621720
PMCPMC5002414
OpenAlexW2509954934

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.