Neuroscience

Articles and news from the latest research reports.

93 notes

Watching TV and Food Intake: The Role of Content
Obesity is a serious and growing health concern worldwide. Watching television (TV) represents a condition during which many habitually eat, irrespective of hunger level. However, as of yet, little is known about how the content of television programs being watched differentially impacts concurrent eating behavior. In this study, eighteen normal-weight female students participated in three counter-balanced experimental conditions, including a ‘Boring’ TV condition (art lecture), an ‘Engaging’ TV condition (Swedish TV comedy series), and a no TV control condition during which participants read (a text on insects living in Sweden). Throughout each condition participants had access to both high-calorie (M&Ms) and low-calorie (grapes) snacks. We found that, relative to the Engaging TV condition, Boring TV encouraged excessive eating (+52% g, P = 0.009). Additionally, the Engaging TV condition actually resulted in significantly less concurrent intake relative to the control ‘Text’ condition (−35% g, P = 0.05). This intake was driven almost entirely by the healthy snack, grapes; however, this interaction did not reach significance (P = 0.07). Finally, there was a significant correlation between how bored participants were across all conditions, and their concurrent food intake (beta = 0.317, P = 0.02). Intake as measured by kcals was similarly patterned but did not reach significance. These results suggest that, for women, different TV programs elicit different levels of concurrent food intake, and that the degree to which a program is engaging (or alternately, boring) is related to that intake. Additionally, they suggest that emotional content (e.g. boring vs. engaging) may be more associated than modality (e.g. TV vs. text) with concurrent intake.
Full Article
(Image: ThinkStock)

Watching TV and Food Intake: The Role of Content

Obesity is a serious and growing health concern worldwide. Watching television (TV) represents a condition during which many habitually eat, irrespective of hunger level. However, as of yet, little is known about how the content of television programs being watched differentially impacts concurrent eating behavior. In this study, eighteen normal-weight female students participated in three counter-balanced experimental conditions, including a ‘Boring’ TV condition (art lecture), an ‘Engaging’ TV condition (Swedish TV comedy series), and a no TV control condition during which participants read (a text on insects living in Sweden). Throughout each condition participants had access to both high-calorie (M&Ms) and low-calorie (grapes) snacks. We found that, relative to the Engaging TV condition, Boring TV encouraged excessive eating (+52% g, P = 0.009). Additionally, the Engaging TV condition actually resulted in significantly less concurrent intake relative to the control ‘Text’ condition (−35% g, P = 0.05). This intake was driven almost entirely by the healthy snack, grapes; however, this interaction did not reach significance (P = 0.07). Finally, there was a significant correlation between how bored participants were across all conditions, and their concurrent food intake (beta = 0.317, P = 0.02). Intake as measured by kcals was similarly patterned but did not reach significance. These results suggest that, for women, different TV programs elicit different levels of concurrent food intake, and that the degree to which a program is engaging (or alternately, boring) is related to that intake. Additionally, they suggest that emotional content (e.g. boring vs. engaging) may be more associated than modality (e.g. TV vs. text) with concurrent intake.

Full Article

(Image: ThinkStock)

Filed under obesity food consumption eating habits television TV health science

  1. drcshane reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  2. codacorpusa reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  3. dolphin-rambles reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  4. afractalparticle reblogged this from astro-stoner
  5. qawiyaaa reblogged this from neurosciencestuff and added:
    hmmmm interesting
  6. perkins-psychology reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  7. pigeonheadpernia reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  8. booleanearth reblogged this from astro-stoner and added:
    Interesting but unsurprising.
  9. astro-stoner reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  10. luluzion reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  11. carbonfiberpussygang reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  12. antoniobu reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  13. mangoachaar reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  14. holy-shit-8 reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  15. fluorescentbrains reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  16. inoshie reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  17. granitetea reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  18. oliveyouidoxiii reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  19. caitvblr reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
free counters