Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37471412›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Reversing food preference through multisensory exposure.

Avishek Chatterjee, Satyaki Mazumder, Koel Das

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Avishek ChatterjeeDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Kolkata, Nadia, West Bengal, India.
Satyaki MazumderDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Kolkata, Nadia, West Bengal, India.
Koel DasDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Kolkata, Nadia, West Bengal, India.ORCID 0000-0001-5727-2152

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Experiencing food craving is nearly ubiquitous and has several negative pathological impacts prompting an increase in recent craving-related research. Food cue-reactivity tasks are often used to study craving, but most paradigms ignore the individual food preferences of participants, which could confound the findings. We explored the neuropsychological correlates of food craving preference using psychophysical tasks on human participants considering their individual food preferences in a multisensory food exposure set-up. Participants were grouped into Liked Food Exposure (LFE), Disliked Food Exposure (DFE), and Neutral Control (NEC) based on their preference for sweet and savory items. Participants reported their momentary craving for the displayed food stimuli through the desire scale and bidding scale (willingness to pay) pre and post multisensory exposure. Participants were exposed to food items they either liked or disliked. Our results asserted the effect of the multisensory food exposure showing a statistically significant increase in food craving for DFE participants postexposure to disliked food items. Using computational models and statistical methods, we also show that the desire for food does not necessarily translate to a willingness to pay every time, and instantaneous subjective valuation of food craving is an important parameter for subsequent action. Our results further demonstrate the role of parietal N200 and centro-parietal P300 in reversing food preference and possibly point to the decrease of inhibitory control in up-regulating craving for disliked food.

Indexed as

CuesFood PreferencesCravingEmotionsFoodHumans

Identifiers

PMID37471412
PMCPMC10359010

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.