When Healthy Food Makes You Hungry

Abstract

Do subtle cues for imposed healthy eating make consumers hungry? Imposed healthy eating signals that the health goal was sufficiently met, and thus it increases the strength of the conflicting motive to fulfill one's appetite. Accordingly, consumers asked to sample an item framed as healthy later reported being hungrier and consumed more food than those who sampled the same item framed as tasty or those who did not eat at all. These effects of healthy eating depend on the consumer's perception that healthy eating is mandatory; therefore, only imposed healthy eating made consumers hungrier, whereas freely choosing to eat healthy did not increase hunger.E xternally imposed controls are common and help individuals adhere to their long-term interests. Thus, mandatory retirement savings, seat belt laws, compulsory physical education in college, and cafeterias that offer only healthy alternatives-all are common examples of how external controls help individuals resolve the internal conflict between options that offer larger but delayed benefits and those that offer lesser but immediate benefits. But, when external constraints lead individuals to adhere to their long-term interests, how does this influence the resultant strength of the compromised short-term interest?We explore this question in the domain of imposed healthy eating. We ask, for example, how having a healthy meal in a cafeteria that offers only healthy alternatives influences the motive to satisfy one's appetite. In particular, we examine how imposed healthy eating influences individuals' experienced hunger. We propose that because adherence to the health goal under externally imposed controls signals that progress has been made without also increasing the sense of personal commitment, it can ironically increase the strength of the competing motive to satisfy one's appetite afterward. Put simply, imposed healthy eating would make people feel hungrier than not eating at all or eating the same food without an emphasis on its healthiness. We further propose that this effect of imposed healthy eating is more pronounced among individuals who are less concerned with watching their diet, Stacey Finkelstein (sfinkels@chicagobooth.edu) is a doctoral candidate and Ayelet Fishbach (ayelet.fishbach@chicagobooth.edu) is professor of behavioral science and marketing at

Salad and satiety. The effect of timing of salad consumption on meal energy intake

“…These studies showed that ad libitum intake can be made comparable to fixed intake if the serving is increased sufficiently; however, serving different portion sizes may confound the interpretation of other outcomes. Examples of cognitive factors that may influence the comparison between fixed and ad libitum intakes are perceptions of the food and the motivations for eating it (Finkelstein & Fishbach, 2010). In the present study, requiring the consumption of a fixed amount led to decreased hunger ratings and reduced meal energy intakes compared to ad libitum intake; these differences were consistent with the differences in the amount of salad consumed, but the contribution of motivational factors cannot be independently evaluated.…”

“…Additionally, few studies have compared the effects of meal manipulations using fixed versus ad libitum consumption. Although using fixed amounts of food reduces variability in intake, imposed consumption differs from typical eating conditions and may have consequences due to differences in demand characteristics or motivational factors (Rolls & McDermott, 1991; Finkelstein & Fishbach, 2010). …”

All in the Family? Parental Roles in the Epidemic of Childhood Obesity

“…Useful insights emerge from consumer research (Finkelstein and Fishbach 2010;Irmack, Vallen and Robinson, 2011). Features such as the perceived variety of a food assortment (Kahn and Wansink 2004), and the size of plates, serving bowls, and/or utensils can all impact the quantity that will be consumed.…”

Effects of subtle and explicit health messages on food choice.

“…First, when food is described as healthy, people have been shown to rate it as less tasty and report enjoying it less (Raghunathan et al, 2006). Second, the mere presence of a healthy option on a menu can lead individuals to believe they have fulfilled their health goal (referred to as a “health halo effect;” Wilcox, Vallen, Block, & Fitzsimons, 2009), which itself can lead to goal violations by making that goal less accessible (Finkelstein & Fishbach, 2010). Believing that the health goal has been fulfilled can also lead to individuals feeling ‘licensed’ to indulge (Chiou, Yang, & Wan, 2011; see also Wilde, 1982).…”

“…By not explicitly drawing attention to the healthfulness of a food, subtle health messages, such as healthy images rather than words, might avoid several of the pitfalls associated with explicit messages. First, a more subtle health message may not cause people to believe they have fulfilled their health goal, so they may not feel licensed to indulge, and the health goal would remain accessible (Finkelstein & Fishbach, 2010). Second, a subtle health message may be less likely to be perceived as a command to behave in a certain way and therefore be less likely to cause reactance.…”