SynthesisAppetite2021
Eating up cognitive resources: Does attentional consumption lead to food consumption?
Synthesis in Appetite, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Eating while distracted: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of distraction on concurrent and later energy intake in adults.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- 3D intelligent printing technology-assisted training improves core competencies of clinical medicine interns: bridging undergraduate further education and community health service needs.Frontiers in public health · 2026Trial
- Attenuated dietary motivation in Wilson's disease correlates with clinical severity.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2026Article
- Impact of mealtime social experiences on student consumption of meals at school: a qualitative analysis of caregiver perspectives.Public health nutrition · 2025Article
- Cognitive restraint and body dissatisfaction are more strongly related to muscle building behaviors for men than women.Eating behaviors · 2025Article
- Tunneling, cognitive load and time orientation and their relations with dietary behavior of people experiencing financial scarcity - an AI-assisted scoping review elaborating on scarcity theory.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2024Article
- Article
- "Sound" Decisions: The Combined Role of Ambient Noise and Cognitive Regulation on the Neurophysiology of Food Cravings.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
What is the role played by attentional load in eating? Does attending to an unrelated task generally lead to overeating, perhaps by preventing individuals from focusing on a goal to limit consumption? Or does such attentional diversion typically lead to reductions in eating, perhaps by preventing people from noticing tempting features of relevant food cues? Past research has supported each of these two propositions, but comparisons between existing studies have been hampered to the extent that various experimental manipulations differ in the degree to which they occupy attention, as well as differing in the particular type of attentional resources they exploit. To resolve existing discrepancies in the literature, in a series of studies, we made use of a working memory manipulation, the n-back task (Kirchner, 1958), that can be systematically modified to induce varying levels of cognitive load, allowing for rigorous comparisons of the effects of different levels of attentional load on eating. These studies revealed a complex pattern of results. Analysis of findings from three studies employing within-subjects designs documented a linear relationship, in that participants consumed less food when completing a higher cognitive-load task than when completing a lower cognitive-load task. Three studies employing between-subjects designs highlighted a less consistent pattern of results, but when combined in a mini-meta-analysis, suggested the opposite linear relationship, with participants assigned to higher cognitive-load conditions generally consuming more food than participants assigned to lower cognitive-load conditions. We conducted two additional studies to reconcile these conflicting patterns of data. Neither finding received unequivocal support, although both studies found that participants ate less when engaged in higher cognitive-load tasks than lower cognitive-load tasks. The precise nature of the relationship between attentional load and eating remains elusive.
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.