Ingested but not perceived: Response to satiety cues disrupted by perceptual load

Abstract

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Using Smartphones When Eating Increases Caloric Intake in Young People: An Overview of the Literature

“…Some potential mechanisms have been proposed to explain the role of distraction in eating behavior (La Marra et al, 2009;Robinson et al, 2014a;Higgs, 2015;Higgs and Spetter, 2018). However, more recently, it has been highlighted that the perceptual load theory could be successfully applied to the study of ingestive behavior (Morris et al, 2020). The perceptual load theory is a key theory in the literature on selective attention and implies that the extent to which task-irrelevant stimuli are processed is regulated by attention availability (Lavie, 2005(Lavie, , 2010.…”

“…It is a passive process carried out automatically by the perceptual system at an early stage of selection and is determined by whether the primary task leaves adequate spare perceptual capacity (Lavie, 2005(Lavie, , 2010. Similarly, it has been suggested that appetite control based on satiety could be altered when attention is absorbed in a perceptually demanding task (Morris et al, 2020). A reliable satiety response is provided by cognitive and physiological stimuli integration (Yeomans and Chambers, 2011;Chambers et al, 2013;Camps et al, 2016;McCrickerd et al, 2020).…”

“…Distractors significantly affect dietary memory formation, preventing the proper awareness of food ingested and interfering with hunger and satiety signals. Satiety is a key component of appetite control and refers to the feeling of fullness which suppresses additional intake (Blundell and Tremblay, 1995;Morris et al, 2020). It is the result of physiological processes that tend to split into early cognitive and sensory influences and, subsequently, into post-ingestive effects (Blundell and Tremblay, 1995;Bellisle and Blundell, 2013).…”

Human hunger as a memory process.

“…A further possibility is that a person may use both the time of day (i.e., lunchtime) and how long it has been since they last ate, to estimate how hungry they should feel. Finally, a large number of other parameters may also influence general hunger ratings, such as current weight-related food restriction (i.e., dieting), the amount of food that a participant believes they have consumed at a previous meal (e.g., Brunstrom et al, 2011), the sensory properties of food eaten at a prior meal, and the degree of attention paid to eating that food (e.g., Yeomans et al, 2017;Morris et al, 2020). All or any of these factors (and probably others too) may then contribute to or influence general hunger ratings.…”

Driven to Snack: Simulated Driving Increases Subsequent Consumption

“…Differences in perceived stress did not explain the differences in subsequent consumption amount between the conditions. bitter solutions, and salty snacks (Hoffmann-Hensel et al, 2017;Liang et al, 2018;van der Wal & van Dillen, 2013), and even promotes increased consumption (Morris et al, 2020;van der Wal & van Dillen, 2013). Participants who were distracted by a working memory task while preparing lemonade at their preferred concentration opted for greater amounts of syrup and consumed more salty buttered crackers than participants who experienced minimal distraction (van der Wal & van Dillen, 2013).…”