↓ Skip to main content

It’s the power of food: individual differences in food cue responsiveness and snacking in everyday life

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
24 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
It’s the power of food: individual differences in food cue responsiveness and snacking in everyday life
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12966-015-0312-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin Schüz, Natalie Schüz, Stuart G. Ferguson

Abstract

Discretionary eating behaviour ("snacking") is dependent on internal and external cues. Individual differences in the effects of these cues suggest that some people are more or less likely to snack in certain situations than others. Previous research is limited to laboratory-based experiments or survey-based food recall. This study for the first time examines everyday snacking using real-time assessment, and examines whether individual differences in cue effects on snacking can be explained by the Power of Food scale (PFS). Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) study with 53 non-clinical participants over an average of 10 days. Multiple daily assessments: Participants reported every snack and responded to randomly timed surveys during the day. Internal and external cues were measured during both types of assessment. Demographic data and PFS scores were assessed during a baseline lab visit. Data were analysed using multilevel linear and multilevel logistic regression with random intercepts and random slopes as well as cross-level interactions with PFS scores. Higher individual PFS scores were associated with more daily snacking on average (B = 0.05, 95 % CI = 0.02,0.08, p < .001). More average daily snacking was associated with higher BMI (B = 1.42, 95 % CI = 0.19,2.65, p = .02). Cue effects (negative affect, arousal, activities, company) on snacking were significantly moderated by PFS: People with higher PFS were more likely to snack when experiencing negative affect, high arousal, engaging in activities, and being alone compared to people with lower PFS scores. PFS scores moderate the effects of snacking cues on everyday discretionary food choices. This puts people with higher PFS at higher risk for potentially unhealthy and obesogenic eating behaviour.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 148 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 23%
Student > Master 23 15%
Student > Bachelor 16 11%
Researcher 10 7%
Student > Postgraduate 8 5%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 39 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 28 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 5%
Social Sciences 8 5%
Other 23 15%
Unknown 47 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 September 2017.
All research outputs
#1,608,405
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#575
of 2,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,547
of 395,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#12
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,116 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 395,324 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.