Understanding disgust-based food rejection in picky and non-picky eaters: Willingness to touch and taste familiar foods with changes

Coulthard, Helen; Abdullahi, Najma; Bell, Katie; Noon, Elizabeth

doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104442

Cited by 9 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Sign. : Food neophobia, N = 534 (Coulthard, Aldridge, & Fox, 2022 Picky eating, N = 232 (Coulthard, Abdullahi, et al, 2022) Fruit and vegetable consumption, N = 70 (Coulthard & Thakker, 2015b) Adherence to Mediterranean diet (in Spain), N = 583 (Navarrete‐Muñoz et al, 2019) Problematic feeding behavior of children living with autism, N = 63 (Zulkifli & Rahman, 2021); N = 111 (Panerai et al, 2020b) …”

Section: Synthesis Of Results and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ten food‐related studies assessed children's tactile sensitivity via caregiver report with a selection of low neurological threshold items from the original SP questionnaire, for example, “Avoids going barefoot, especially in sand or grass” (Coulthard & Sahota, 2016; Coulthard & Thakker, 2015b) reporting internal consistency of α ≥ .75 or a shortened version developed for screening and research, the short sensory profile (SSP) (McIntosh et al, 1999) reporting internal consistencies between α = .69. and α = .75, two studies using a validated Spanish version (Navarrete‐Muñoz et al, 2019; Navarrete‐Muñoz et al, 2020). Further, three studies used a sub‐selection of the adolescent/adult sensory profile scale (AASP) (Brown & Dunn, 2002) tactile dimension items for adult respondents that corresponded to low neurological threshold, for example, “I dislike having my back massaged” reporting somewhat lower internal consistency of α > .60 (Coulthard, Abdullahi, et al, 2022; Coulthard, Aldridge, & Fox, 2022; Coulthard & Sahota, 2016). The food‐related questionnaires came into application both with neurotypical populations as well populations with a diagnosis that could lead to heightened sensitivity such as autism.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many of the studies tested associations to diet and food intake behavior, concluding significant associations to picky eating (Coulthard, Abdullahi, et al, 2022; Zickgraf et al, 2022), food neophobia (Coulthard, Aldridge, & Fox, 2022; Coulthard & Blissett, 2009; Coulthard & Sahota, 2016), fruit and vegetable consumption (Coulthard & Blissett, 2009; Coulthard & Thakker, 2015b), adherence to Mediterranean diet (in Spain) (Navarrete‐Muñoz et al, 2019) and feeding problems in children living with autism (Panerai et al, 2020a; Zulkifli & Rahman, 2021). Two studies with lower sample sizes ( N ≤ 70) did not find significant associations to food neophobia (Coulthard & Thakker, 2015b) as well as picky eating and food variety (Nederkoorn et al, 2015).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Heinze et al (2018) found a positive correlation between fat detection thresholds (using milk based food models) and the intake of high-fat food, however they worked with only 30 subjects in their study. By using behavioral measures (sensitivity questionnaires) Coulthard, Aldridge, and Fox (2022) linked an enhanced tactile sensitivity with higher food neophobia, while Coulthard, Abdullahi, et al (2022) connected it to picky eating. However, Appiani et al…”

Section: Links To Diet and Food Intake Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Methodological approaches to assess tactile sensitivity in the food context—A scoping review

Galler,

Varela

2023

Journal of Texture Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In contrast to taste sensitivity, the assessment of texture or tactile sensitivity has received relatively little attention in the food context. Texture plays an important role in food preferences and food intake, and individual differences make it important to understand physiological drivers of perception as tactile sensitivity. The multi‐dimensional and dynamic aspects of texture perception suggest there is not one single method that can explain individual differences. This scoping review aims to systematically map methods assessing tactile sensitivity, in the context of food, highlighting differences in approach and implementation. Eligibility criteria included papers describing methods to assess individual differences in tactile sensitivity, that involved human participants and the context was relevant to food behavior. Sources are peer‐reviewed publications of original research in English. In mapping the methods, we assessed how they relate to food texture parameters (mechanical, geometrical, and surface) and the dynamics of breaking down (touch with hand, first bite/sip, oral processing, residual or after‐swallowing sensations). We also review other parameters associated (oral processing, preference, diet and food intake behavior). The literature in this relatively young area is still very fragmented and it is difficult to have a clear picture regarding best practices or recommendations for the measurement of tactile sensitivity in the food context. Future studies should aim to methodological harmonization for application in the food behavior area, with a design of experiment combining different aspects of tactile sensitivity to food, focusing on the thresholds and perceived intensity of textural parameters as well as affective and behavioral responses, and covering the whole spectrum of tactile texture perception (mechanical, geometrics, and surface), including the dynamics of perception.

show abstract

Section: Synthesis Of Results and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Links To Diet and Food Intake Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Methodological approaches to assess tactile sensitivity in the food context—A scoping review

Galler,

Varela

2023

Journal of Texture Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Coulthard ve ark. (2022) iğrenmenin, seçici yiyicilerin en az değişiklik belirtisi olan yiyecekleri (örneğin, tohum eklenmiş ekmek) bile reddetmelerine yol açtığını ve bozulmuş/çürümüş yiyeceklerle karşılaştıklarındakine benzer bir davranış göstereceklerini belirtmiştir (42). Son olarak, ölçeğin orijinal çalışması ve Çin uyarlaması bulgularını destekler şekilde, İtalyan uyarlamasında da seçici yemenin psikososyal bozukluklarla ilişkili olduğu bildirilmiştir (35).…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Adaptation of the Adult Picky Eating Questionnaire

HAMURCU

ŞAHİN

ÇELİK

2023

Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amaç: Bu çalışmada The Adult Picky Eating Questionnaire’ın Türkçe uyarlaması olan Yetişkin Seçici Yeme Ölçeği’nin geçerlilik ve güvenilirliğini ortaya koymak amaçlanmıştır. Yöntem: Metodolojik araştırma tasarımı kullanılan çalışma, 2021-2022 akademik yılında XXX Üniversitesi’nde 222 katılımcıyla yürütülmüştür. Google Formlar’da yapılandırılmış bir anket aracılığıyla Bilgi Formu, Yetişkin Seçici Yeme Ölçeği ve Yeme Tutum Testi uygulanmıştır. İstatistiksel değerlendirmede iç tutarlılık katsayısı, faktör analizleri ve korelasyonları IBM SPSS26® yazılımı ile yapılmıştır. Bulgular: Yetişkin Seçici Yeme Ölçeği’nin 114 kişi ile yürütülen pilot çalışmasında, Cronbach’s Alpha değeri 0.795 bulunarak, ölçeğin oldukça güvenilir olduğu olduğu ve ölçekten madde çıkartılmadan, geçerlilik analizine uygun olduğu belirlenmiştir. Çalışmanın 222 örneklemli Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi’nde, Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin değeri 0.788 ile örneklem hacminin iyi düzeyde yeterli olduğu ve Bartlett Küresellik testi ile χ2=722.637 ve p=0.000 düzeyinde istatistiki açıdan anlamlılık olduğu bulunmuştur. Faktör yükleri >0.20 ve öz değerleri >1 olan ve toplam varyansın %56.768’ini açıklayan dört faktörlü bir yapı saptanmıştır. Çalışmanın Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi’nde 16 maddelik versiyonun uyum iyiliği indeksleri RMSEA=0.010; CFI=0.998; GFI=0.975; NFI=0.933; SRMR=0.059; AGFI=0.966; χ2/df=0.906 olarak yeterli uyum gösterdiği saptanmıştır. İç tutarlılık analizinde Cronbach’s Alpha katsayısı 0.829 olarak bulunmuştur. Sonuç: Yetişkinlerde seçici yemeyi ölçmeye yarayan Yetişkin Seçiçi Yeme Ölçeği’nin Türkçe Formu’nun geçerli ve güvenilir olduğu gösterilmiştir.

show abstract

The Functions of Human Touch: An Integrative Review

Saluja,

Croy,

Stevenson

2024

J Nonverbal Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There appears to be no attempt to categorize the specific classes of behavior that the tactile system underpins. Awareness of how an organism uses touch in their environment informs understanding of its versatility in non-verbal communication and tactile perception. This review categorizes the behavioral functions underpinned by the tactile sense, by using three sources of data: (1) Animal data, to assess if an identified function is conserved across species; (2) Human capacity data, indicating whether the tactile sense can support a proposed function; and (3) Human impaired data, documenting the impacts of impaired tactile functioning (e.g., reduced tactile sensitivity) for humans. From these data, three main functions pertinent to the tactile sense were identified: Ingestive Behavior; Environmental Hazard Detection and Management; and Social Communication. These functions are reviewed in detail and future directions are discussed with focus on social psychology, non-verbal behavior and multisensory perception.

show abstract

Understanding disgust-based food rejection in picky and non-picky eaters: Willingness to touch and taste familiar foods with changes

Cited by 9 publications

References 60 publications

Methodological approaches to assess tactile sensitivity in the food context—A scoping review

Methodological approaches to assess tactile sensitivity in the food context—A scoping review

Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Adaptation of the Adult Picky Eating Questionnaire

The Functions of Human Touch: An Integrative Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About