social influences on eating behaviour week/lecture 7 Flashcards
development of eating habits
- Direct experience of foods and their consequences
- Exposure to patterns of eating within a social/cultural context
- Knowledge from nutrition education
- Habitual food selection and consumption
- Expectations develop
dieting and food intake
- Eat more when distracted
- Cognitive load important
○ Blass et al., 2006 - TV vs music - May interfere with food memory
○ Higgs and Woodward, 2009 - subsequent snack intake - Food related distractors (variety) can also lead to increased intake
○ E.g. Heatherington et al., 2006
§ Study 1: 33 ppts (23 female) attended lab 4 times to eat snack of popcorn (sweet or salted)
§ 4 different conditions
□ Control
□ Same taste
□ Congruent taste
□ Incongruent taste
§ Study 2: food focus vs food distraction
- Cognitive load important
what does distraction do to satiety
delays it
social facilitation
- Tendency to eat more in presence of others
social facilitation
- De Castro 1997 diary studies
- People eating in groups ate 44% more than those eating alone
- Presence of others has a cumulative effect, but the incremental size of the effect declines as the number of others increases (de Castro and Brewer 1991) - social correlation
social impact theory Latane 1981
- Peoples feelings, attitudes and behaviours can be manipulated by the presence of others
- The subsequent impact on behaviour is a result of the interaction between:
○ Strength or source of the impact
○ Their immediacy/proximity
○ Number of sources exerting the impact
- The subsequent impact on behaviour is a result of the interaction between:
- The group context
○ Clendenen, Herman and Polivy, 1994 - social facilitation among friends vs strangers
○ Herman 2003 - social correlation effect only present for friends and family not strangers
○ Gender differences - Salvy et al., 2007
○ Eating in crowd vs defined group - relatedness seems to be important (Hirsch and Kramer, 1993)
time extension hypothesis
- Increased duration of meals with others - but no modification of eating rate (de Castro; 1990)
- Time extension hypothesis (Pliner et al., 2006)
- More people = more socialisation = increased meal length (and increased exposure to food cues) –> increased consumption
- More relaxing environment?
social facilitation vs distraction
- 35 ppts (21 men) attended lab 4 times (within subjects)
○ Control - ate alone
○ Distraction - ate alone with TV on
○ Strangers - eat in presence of 2 sex strangers
○ Friends - eat in presence of 2 same sex friends- All sessions recorded and analysed
study for social facilitation as a positive
- Walker-Clarke, Walesek & Meyer (2022) systematic review of psychosocial factors influencing the eating behaviours of older adults
eating alone in older adults linked to
○ Reduced intake
○ Increased likelihood of low BMI
○ Lower food diversity
○ Decreased consumption of fruit and veg
○ Higher likelihood of skipping meals
○ Reduced food enjoyment
impression management
- Attempt to control views of other members of group through socially acceptable behaviour, even if they do not habitually express such behaviour (Leary, 1995)
You are what, how and how much you eat
- Vartanian et al. 2007; 2015
- Consumption stereotypes
○ Individuals who consume healthier are rate as more feminine, moral and as having a smaller body size and being less fun
○ Smaller meals –> femininity, physical attractiveness, leaner, neatness
○ Meat, masculinity and morality (Rozin et al., 2012; Ruby and Heine, 2011)
- Consumption stereotypes
studies for impression management
- Lipschitz and Herman (2010)
○ Threat to masculine identity –> increased intake of meat- White and Dahl (2006)
○ Males motivated to avoid feminine foods - Type and amount of food selected (Young et al., 2009)
- Role for relative consumption (Leone, Herman and Pliner, 2008)
- White and Dahl (2006)
impression management contexts
- Eating with strangers
a. Possible explanation for reduced social facilitation with strangers- Job interviews
a. Can/does food intake convey personal characteristics that could be relevant to job performance? - Romantic relationships
a. First date foods (Amiraian and Sobal, 2009)
- Job interviews
Ruddock et al 2019
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of 42 studies exploring the social facilitation effect
- Eat more when with friends (29%-48% larger compared to eating alone)
- Moderating factors may indicate impression management
○ Weight status, gender and food types
○ E.g. women eating smaller portions in front on men regardless of familiarity
○ Overweight people eat smaller portions when eating with others compared to alone
modelling and EB
- Perceived eating habits of others are important
- Nisbett and Storms (1974) taste test study
○ Food consumption of the confederate influenced consumption of ppt
- Nisbett and Storms (1974) taste test study
caveats of modelling
○ Presence of the confederate
○ Similarity of the confederate
○ Attractiveness/slimness
○ Hunger
○ Realism
modelling and confederates
- Confederate studies replicated many times
- Ppts eat nearly 2x as much in the high intake condition compared to low intake condition
○ Feeney et al., 2011, Herman et al., 2010 - Studies have replicated effects in children
○ Belevander et al., 2012 - Dyad studies
○ Herman et al., 2005
○ Robinson et al., 2011 - Impact on food choice
○ Robinson and Higgs 2013 - Evidence:
○ Cruwys, Belevander and Hermans 2015: robustness of the modelling effect
§ Increased desire for affiliation/perceived similarities to model
§ Attenuation for healthy snacks or breakfast/lunch
§ Food choice vs food intake
§ Limited evidence for moderating effects of hunger, presence, age, weight, personality, eating goals, etc
- Ppts eat nearly 2x as much in the high intake condition compared to low intake condition
role of perceived similarity (shared identity) - study
- Cruwys et al., 2012
○ N=119 female university students
○ Exposed to 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
modelling for approariateness
○ Normative theory (Herman and 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
modelling for ingratiation (trying to be liked)
○ Behavioural mimicry (automatic process - cognitive load)
○ Remote confederate design
evidence for social comparison theory (Festinger 1954)
§ Body image and media exposure
□ Eating after exposure to thin images
□ Overall decrease; restraint predicts increase in consumption
§ Modelling only when similarities exist
§ Presence of other at a meal
□ Salvy et al 2009
§ Pizza slice study
□ Polivy, Herman and Deo 2010
what are social norms
- Social norms are implicit codes of conduct that provide a guide to appropriate action
○ Perceived standards for appropriate consumption for particular social group
○ Communicated via cultural practices and rules, behaviours or via env. cues
○ Descriptive (perceived prevalence) vs injunctive (perceived expectations) norms
