Unhealthy eating habits involving the consumption of highly-palatable energy-dense foods are a major contributor to weight gain its associated health conditions. Consumption of these “unhealthy” items continues to be common despite ongoing efforts for promoting healthy-eating behavior. However, relatively little is known about the factors that lead to the consumption of unhealthy foods. Prior research has shown that states of hunger influence the desire to eat without changing the perception or enjoyment of food items. The present study utilized an online-survey which asked participants to rate foods according to the items’ palatability, likelihood of being consumed, and healthiness. Demographic and bodily state information was also collected. The results of this study demonstrate that, in college students, a state of hunger biases the selection (“wanting”) of foods toward highly-palatable (“tasty”) food items. However, this finding was not observed in data gathered from a sample of older adults affiliated with a health and fitness organization. Collectively, this may suggest that age, education, or increased health-awareness can influence the preference for high-palatable foods that occurs when individuals are hungry.

Objective: Migraine refers to recurrent, unilateral headache attacks, lasting 4-72 hours, that have a pulsating quality. A meta-analysis was conducted comparing cognition on clinical measures between individuals with migraine and healthy controls. Data Selection: We searched the University of South Alabama Libraries’ OneSearch and PubMed using a uniform search-strategy to locate original research comparing cognition between migraine and control samples. Analyses were modeled under random effects. Hedge’s g was used as a bias-corrected estimate of effect size. We assessed between-study heterogeneity using Cochran’s Q and I2. Data Synthesis: The initial search interval spanned inception–May 2021 and yielded 6692 results. Fifty-two studies were analyzed (migraine n=5324, control n=16540). Meta-analysis showed a significant combined effect size of migraine across all studies (g=-0.37, p<.001), with high heterogeneity (Q=329.84, p<.001, I2=84.54). Trim-and-fill procedure estimated 0 studies to be missing due to publication bias (adjusted g=-0.37, Q=329.84). Within-domain effects of migraine were: Executive Functioning=-0.40, Global Cognition/Orientation=-0.20, Language=-0.30, Learning/Memory=-0.24, Motor=-0.09, Processing Speed=-0.42, Screener=-0.50, Simple/Complex Attention=-0.35, and Visuospatial/Construction=-0.36. Heterogeneity was moderate to high within domains. Meta-regressions indicated education and disease duration were not related to effect sizes. Age and gender were related to effect sizes such that studies with older and higher percentage of female clinical participants yielded greater (negative) differences. Conclusions: Individuals with migraine consistently demonstrated lower performances on neuropsychological tests compared to controls. Effect sizes were generally small in strength, with largest effects in Executive Functioning, Processing Speed, and Screeners. This quantitative summary indicates that, through use of neuropsychological tests, individuals with migraine experience difficulties in multiple aspects of cognition.

Objective: Demographic correction of cognitive data is being increasingly scrutinized. We compared phonemic fluency for African Americans and Caucasians using three normative systems. Methods: Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT)/FAS raw scores for 321 African Americans (56.4% female, mean age 50 years, mean education 13 years) and a matched sample of 330 Caucasians (53.6% female, mean age 47, mean education 13.5 years) were converted to T-scores using three normative systems (Heaton et al., 2004; Mitrushina et al., 1999; Schretlen et al., 2010). ANOVA was used to compare differences for the overall sample as well as for education level (15 years) and age range (18-35, 36-50, 51-65, and >65 years old). Results: Normative outcomes were significantly different between African American and Caucasian participants [Heaton (F (1,516) = 6.77, p=.01; Mitrushina F (1,509) = 10.32, p=.001; Shretlen F (1,516) = 14.15, p=.001]. Heaton norms were significantly different for ethnicity for all education levels except >15 years of education. Mitrushina meta-norms and CNNS (Schretlen et al., 2010) were significantly different for ethnicity on FAS scores only for >15 years of education. Heaton norms were significantly different for ethnicity for the ranges of 18-35 years old and 51-65 years old. Mitrushina meta-norms and CNNS were significantly different for ethnicity only for the 36-50 years range. None of the norming systems were significantly different for >65 years. Conclusions: The interpretation of FAS performance for African Americans and Caucasians differed by the normative system utilized with different effects for age and education noted between normative approaches.

Objective: The BDEFS was compared to objective executive functioning (EF) measures as well as five-factor model (FFM) personality traits. Methods: One hundred sixty-five participants (M=19 years old, SD=1.3; 72.7% female, 55.2% White, 35.2% African American, 4.8% Asian) completed IPIP-NEO Personality Inventory, BDEFS-Long Form, Neuropsychological Assessment Battery (NAB) EF module, and Trail-Making Test (TMT) Parts A and B. Results: EF measures were reduced to a single-factor score using EFA (TMT A and B; NAB Mazes, Categories, and Word Generation subtests) accounting for 34% of the variance. Regression predicting BDEFS total score from the EF factor score was not significant [F(1,163)=.182; p =.67, r2=.001]. Stepwise multiple regression predicting BDEFS total score from FFM traits identified three significant predictors (neuroticism: β=.390, extraversion: β=.239, and conscientiousness: β=-.572) that accounted for 54% of the variance [F(5,159)=36.78; p<.001, r2=.54]. Stepwise regression predicting the EF factor score from FFM traits was not significant [F(5,159)=.57; p=.721, r2=.018]. Conclusions: Performance-based EF measures were not related to BDEFS total score supporting that different constructs are being measured. Personality traits accounted for a majority of variance in BDEFS performance but minimal variance for performance-based EF performance. These results suggest that personality traits are strongly related to an individual’s appraisal of executive dysfunction.