modelling

Question 1

modelling

Answer 1

• Perceived eating habits of others are important.
• Nisbett & Storms (1974) taste test study
  ▫ Food consumption of the confederate influenced
  consumption of participant. hihg intake condition (confederate eats more, participant eats 2x more)
• Caveats…
  ▫ Presence of the confederate
  ▫ Similarity of the confederate
  ▫ Attractiveness / slimness
  ▫ Hunger
  ▫ Realism

lab study

Question 1

modelling 2

Answer 1

• Confederate studies replicated many times
• Evidence to suggest that participants eat nearly twice as
  much in the high intake condition compared to low intake
  condition.
  ▫ Feeney et al., (2011); Hermans et al., (2010).
• Studies have replicated effects in children (Belevander et al., (2012).
• Dyad studies- 2 participants eat similar amounts, matching effect
  ▫ Herman et al., (2005);
  ▫ Robinson et al., (2011)
• Impact on food choice
  ▫ Robinson & Higgs (2013).

Question 2

modelling evidence

Answer 2

Cruwys, Belevander & Hermans (2015): robustness of
the modelling effect (69 studies reviewd! 64 demonstrated a sig modelling effect)

▫ Increased desire for affiliation/perceived similarities
to model (think you are similar)
▫ Attenuation for healthy snacks or breakfast/lunch
▫ Food choice versus food intake (more studies in food intake)
▫ Limited evidence for moderating effects of hunger,
presence, age, weight, personality, eating goals etc.

Social modeling is a primary determinant of food intake and food choice.
*
Sixty-nine experimental studies of modeling were reviewed.
*
Modeling is not moderated by hunger, restraint, age, or weight.
*
Modeling is strongest for intake of snack foods and for in-group models.
*
Modeling has relevance for public health interventions to encourage healthy eating.

Question 3

the role of perceived similarity

Answer 3

Cruwys et al., (2012)
* N = 119 female university students
* Exposed to a confederate (4 conditions)
▫ In group vs. out group
 All of the popcorn (high norm) vs. None of the popcorn (low norm)
* “Evaluation of university promotion videos”
* Measured how much popcorn was consumed.

• No differences in popcorn consumption between low
  and high norm conditions when confederate is
  presented as an ‘outgroup’ member
• Modelling of eating behaviour occurs for both the low
  and high norm conditions when confederate is
  presented as an ‘in group’ member. e.g. people ate more when confederate in ‘in group’ condition ate more

speaks for the perceived similarity for the participant and confederate-

Question 4

modelling: the theory

Answer 4

• Modelling for appropriateness
  ▫ Normative theory (Herman & Polivy, 2005)
  ▫ Principle regulatory influence on eating in social contexts is
  people’s beliefs about what or how much is appropriate to
  eat.
  ▫ Uncertainty and affiliation motives
• Modelling for ingratiation (trying to be liked)
  ▫ Behavioural mimicry (automatic process – cognitive
  load)
  ▫ Remote confederate design

Question 5

when is modelling likely to occur?

Answer 5

• percieved similarity between oursleves and the model
• desire to affiliate with the model
• unfamiliar situations