variety and sensory specific satiety Flashcards
Studies that show variety increases risk of weight
Increasing variety in taste, texture, appearance and choice of
foods can increase food intake, and is linked with higher
weight.
- Bellisle & LeMagnen (1980) – Pizza, sausage rolls & egg
roll (together or singularly) - Rolls, van Duijvenvoorde & Rolls (1984) – Four different
courses vs. four courses of the same food (40% increase)
studies which show fussiness increases obesity risk
Thornsteindottir 2022-
Hayes 2016-Greater decreases in FF (food fussiness) were associated with greater reductions in child body mass index and improved overall diet quality. Overall, diet quality change through FBT (family-based behavioral weight loss treatment) mediated the relation between child FF change and child body mass index change.
Ozdemir 2018 - Food Responsiveness and Food Fussiness eating variables were found to be associated with high energy intake and high BMI resulting childhood obesity. Different strategies can be developed to reduce the effects of these eating behaviors on weight gain during
childhood.
what is sensory specific satiety
Sensory specific satiety (Rolls, 1986)
❖Changes in pleasantness occur rapidly (within 2 minutes of consumption pleasantness drops)
and last up to an hour (Hetherington, Burley, & Rolls, 1989).
❖The decrease in enjoyment and intake of the already-consumed food is
driven by a reduction in both liking and wanting of the food (Brunstrom
& Mitchell, 2006; Havermans et al., 2009; Raynor & Epstein, 2001).
❖Suggests that it occurs a result of sensory stimulation rather than
postabsorbtive affects (largest changes occur before meal absorbed). - its not the biological postabsorbtive effetcs, its the sensory aspect of the food that causes SSS, hence it sets in so early (2 minutes)
❖Important impact on meal termination (and overall intake). Variety
undermines the process and promotes increased consumption.
SSS prevents overconsumption of one food, but encourages the consumption of a new food when available!
impact of fluids
- Variety promotes switching between foods, which may
delay SSS. - What about the impact of drinking on SSS?
Cunningham et al., (2023) - Video recordings of meal consumption
- Assessed patterns of bites, sips and the number of
switches between them; also assessed SSS - Switching between bites and sips more frequently was linked with
greater food consumption - Overall water intake was also linked with greater food intake.
- Suggestion that switching between food and water may promote
energy intake by attenuating the development of SSS
mechanisms of SSS
- Habituation & monotony (Epstein et al, 1992; 1993)
* Reduction in pleasantness of, & salivation to lemon juice over 10 trials; presentation of new stimulus dishabituated response
* Pleasantness of water reduced among those who tasted it AND those who drank it (Rolls, 1982).
* Habituation regardless of energy content or ingestion. - Central mechanisms - neurophysiological explanation
(Rolls, 1993)
* Satiety linked to decreased OFC neuronal response - A role for endogenous opioids
* Hypothalamic release of opioid peptides associated with reward
* Blocking the release or the reuptake of these peptides (via drugs) disrupts SSS.
other mechanisms
Sensory stimulation vs satiation/satiety
The Appetizer Effect (Yeomans, 1996)
* High initial ratings of highly liked food
* Offered bland, palatable and strong flavoured
food (pasta + oregano).
* Palatable flavour → enhanced intake, eating rate
and reported appetite (the appetizer effect)
* Decline in pleasantness & desire to eat still
follows – reflects satiation
* So, sensory stimulation explains initiation not
termination
other mechanisms pt 2
Sensory stimulation vs satiation/satiety
Chocolate overeaters (Hetherington & McDiarmid, 1995)
* Are highly liked foods (e.g., chocolate) resistant to satiation and SSS
among over-eaters?
* those who were chocolate eaters were less effected by SSS, suggesting we may be able to override these effects with repeated exposure?
highly palatable foods
this study highlights how indiviudal differences are important- people may be more or less vunerable to this process
people who say they overate chocolate on a regular basis. these people consumed a lot more than control when testing SSS
Can we extrapolate SSS to consider the role of dietary variety?
- Hirsch et al., 2005.
▫ Low food intake and loss of body weight
among military personnel when fed rations
in the field.
▫ Intake of ration food among students in a
cafeteria setting considerably higher.
▫ Highlighted a role for long term monotony
(gradual decline in acceptance and caloric
intake) and situational context to explain
food consumption
This study shows that military personnel eat less and lose weight when relying solely on packaged military rations, but they eat adequately and maintain weight when the same rations are served in a cafeteria-style setting. The difference is attributed to both the characteristics of the food (like variety and presentation) and the eating environment (like social interactions and ease of eating). The study emphasizes that both the food itself and the dining context affect how much people eat.
habituation and monotomy
Habituation is a learning process in which repeated exposure to a stimulus reduces responsiveness over time (Epstein et al., 2009). In the context of eating, habituation decreases the rewarding properties of food, naturally limiting intake. When an individual eats the same food repeatedly (monotony), habituation accelerates, leading to reduced interest and lower consumption of that food (Temple et al., 2008). Monotony, therefore, can act as a safeguard against overeating by promoting habituation to a specific food.
However, sensory-specific satiety disrupts monotony by promoting interest in new foods during a single meal. This shift occurs because introducing a food with different sensory attributes overrides habituation and renews the reward response (Rolls, 2015). For example, an individual who feels satiated after consuming a savory dish may still have room for a sweet dessert. This effect creates opportunities for increased food intake, particularly when a variety of foods are readily available.
disrupted habituation and monotomy
Food Variety Delays Habituation:
Introducing novel foods or sensory attributes (e.g., changing flavors, textures, or temperatures) delays habituation, maintaining high reward responses and encouraging continued eating. Research has shown that greater food variety increases total caloric intake, as individuals consume more when exposed to a range of sensory cues (Epstein et al., 2009). For instance, in buffet settings, the variety of available foods prevents habituation and leads to overeating.
Highly Palatable Foods Overwhelm Satiation Mechanisms:
Foods that are high in sugar, fat, and salt are engineered to be highly palatable, prolonging sensory-specific satiety. The pleasure derived from consuming these foods delays habituation and weakens signals of satiety, resulting in sustained eating (Temple et al., 2008).
Disruption of Monotony:
Monotony naturally limits intake by reducing the rewarding properties of a specific food. However, in modern food environments, variety prevents monotony from setting in. The availability of numerous options encourages individuals to “reset” their sensory experience, leading to overeating even when physiological satiety has been reached (Rolls, 2012).
natural vs modern environments
In Natural Environments: Sensory-specific satiety ensures balanced nutrient intake by preventing overconsumption of any single food and encouraging dietary variety. This is particularly adaptive in environments with limited food options.
In Modern Environments: Excessive food variety prevents habituation and reduces the effects of monotony, leading to higher overall intake. For example, individuals who eat a meal with multiple courses (savory, sweet, and salty foods) often consume far more calories than they would from a monotonous, single-course meal (Epstein et al., 2011).
Epstein et al. (2009) found that delayed habituation, caused by food variety, leads to increased caloric intake, particularly among individuals susceptible to overeating
Rolls et al. (1981) demonstrated that individuals consumed significantly more food in buffet settings with high food variety compared to meals with limited options.
limitations in sensory specific satiety research
Sensory-specific satiety (SSS) research, while insightful, has several limitations that affect its generalizability and real-world applicability. One key issue is its focus on short-term food intake within controlled laboratory settings, which may not reflect long-term eating behaviors or food consumption in natural environments. Many studies test simple, single-dimension foods with clear sensory attributes, overlooking the complexity of multi-attribute foods commonly consumed in daily life. Additionally, individual differences in sensitivity to SSS, such as variations in hunger, BMI, and reward responsiveness, influence its effects, particularly in individuals with obesity, who may experience weaker or delayed sensory-specific satiety. Psychological factors, such as stress and emotional eating, can also override SSS, further complicating its role in appetite regulation. In modern food environments, excessive food variety and the prevalence of highly palatable foods delay habituation, weakening the natural decline in reward response and encouraging overeating. Moreover, cultural differences in eating patterns and food preferences highlight the need for more diverse and representative studies. Finally, the lack of longitudinal research limits our understanding of how SSS influences food intake and weight gain over time, particularly its interaction with habituation
