food response inhibition training 2 Flashcards
efficacy of food response inhibition training
Laboratory-based experiments have shown that participants who underwent FRIT consumed fewer high-calorie snacks compared to control groups (Veling et al., 2013). Furthermore, some studies report sustained effects, suggesting that repeated exposure to inhibitory training can create lasting changes in eating behavior (Lawrence et al., 2015).
Real-world applications of FRIT have also shown promise. For instance, mobile applications incorporating inhibition training tasks have been developed, allowing users to practice inhibitory control in their daily lives (Allom et al., 2016). These tools make the intervention scalable and accessible, addressing barriers to widespread implementation.
Theory
FRIT is rooted in the principles of cognitive psychology, particularly the concept of inhibitory control. Inhibitory control refers to the ability to suppress prepotent responses to stimuli, which is crucial in resisting tempting but unhealthy food choices (Houben et al., 2011). FRIT typically involves computerized tasks that train individuals to associate specific foods with stopping or withholding responses. For instance, participants may press a button for neutral stimuli but inhibit their response when high-calorie foods appear
The theoretical rationale is supported by dual-process models of decision-making, which posit that eating behavior is influenced by both automatic and controlled processes. FRIT aims to strengthen the controlled processes by mitigating the automatic appeal of palatable foods (Stice et al., 2017). By repeatedly pairing unhealthy foods with inhibitory signals, the intervention seeks to reduce their hedonic appeal and promote healthier eating patterns.
limitations
Despite its potential, FRIT is not without limitations. One significant concern is the variability in its effectiveness across individuals and contexts. Personality traits, such as impulsivity and sensitivity to food cues, may moderate the intervention’s success (Jones et al., 2018). For highly impulsive individuals, the cognitive demands of FRIT may be insufficient to override habitual eating patterns.
Another critique is the short duration of most studies, which limits understanding of the long-term efficacy of FRIT. While some research suggests enduring benefits, others find that the effects diminish without continued training (Stice et al., 2017). Moreover, the mechanistic underpinnings of FRIT remain underexplored, raising questions about whether it directly reduces food cravings or merely distracts participants from immediate temptations.
Practical challenges also hinder the widespread adoption of FRIT. Adherence to training protocols can be low, especially in unsupervised settings (Allom et al., 2016). Additionally, concerns about the ecological validity of computerized tasks have been raised, as these do not always replicate real-world eating environments.
ethical concerns
Ethical concerns arise when deploying FRIT at scale. For instance, some critics argue that targeting inhibitory control might inadvertently perpetuate weight stigma or promote disordered eating behaviors, particularly in vulnerable populations (Lawrence et al., 2015). Careful framing of the intervention is essential to ensure it supports holistic well-being rather than solely emphasizing weight loss.
generate negative relationship with food
