BACKGROUND:Eating while distracted [e.g., television (TV) watching, phone use] is believed to increase food intake. A previous small meta-analysis of experimental studies (published in American Journal of Clinical Nutrition) supported this. Many studies have since been published, but there has been no updated analysis. OBJECTIVES:This study aimed to conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the effect of distraction on concurrent and later energy intake. METHODS:Eligible articles (searching up to December 2024) were identified from: a previously conducted meta-analysis which included studies up until 2012; database searches from 2012 to 2024 (PsycINFO, Medline, and PubMed); and both forward and backward citation searching. We followed PRISMA guidelines and conducted generic variance inverse meta-analyses with intake as the outcome variable for both concurrent and later energy intake. RESULTS:A total of 50 eligible studies were included (40 measuring concurrent intake, 10 measuring later intake). Random effects meta-analyses revealed that the overall effect of distraction on concurrent energy intake was nonsignificant [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.123, 95% confidence interval (CI): <-0.01, 0.25; P = 0.051]. Moderator analyses revealed that type of distractor moderated the effect of distraction on eating, with passive distractor tasks (e.g., TV watching) resulting in greater energy intake when distracted [SMD = 0.272 (95% CI: 0.128, 0.417)], whereas physically demanding distractors [SMD = -0.139 (95% CI: -0.334, 0.057)] and cognitively demanding distractors [SMD = 0.202 (95% CI: -0.028, 0.432)] did not. The effect of distraction on later energy intake was statistically significant, such that eating while distracted led to greater intake at a subsequent eating episode [SMD = 0.419 (95% CI: 0.195, 0.642)]. CONCLUSIONS:Distracted eating increases later energy intake; however, the effect of distracted eating on concurrent energy intake is less consistent, and only relatively passive distractors may increase energy intake. Collectively, these findings suggest that distraction is a potential contributor to overeating. This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42024518245.

BACKGROUND:It is standard practice for healthcare providers to give weight loss advice or counseling to higher-weight patients (ie, those with a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2), but the immediate psychological consequences of this practice have rarely been examined. PURPOSE:We hypothesized that receiving weight loss advice from a healthcare provider might lead people to feel both motivated to engage in healthy behaviors and stigmatized for their weight. METHODS:Participants with higher weight (N = 294) were randomly assigned to read one of two doctor-patient interaction scenarios, and they were asked to imagine that they were the patient receiving advice. The scenario either involved the doctor giving behavioral weight loss advice (ie, standard diet and exercise recommendations) or control advice, which did not address weight or weight loss. Immediately after reading, participants reported their levels of behavioral motivation and weight-based identity threat. RESULTS:Participants who received weight loss (versus control) advice reported significantly greater motivation for healthy eating and greater weight-based identity threat (Ps < .001, ds from 0.42 to 0.64). There were no significant group differences in perceptions of provider empathy or willingness to engage with the healthcare system in the future (Ps > .1, ds from 0.13 to 0.2). CONCLUSIONS:As hypothesized, receiving weight loss advice made participants feel motivated to engage in healthy eating behavior, but it also made them feel stigmatized. These findings suggest that the standard practice of delivering weight loss advice should be reexamined, as it may harm higher-weight people and perpetuate inequity.

OBJECTIVE:Both affectively-charged and reflective motivation may be necessary to sustain recommended physical activity (PA) guidelines, especially in contexts with tempting alternatives. However, our understanding of how different sources of motivation facilitate PA across contexts is limited. This paper presents a novel value-based model that specifies how affectively-charged and reflective motivation interact to support PA decisions based on available alternatives at a given decision point. METHODS AND MEASURES:Two scenario studies tested model assumptions by examining one's general intrinsic motivation for PA (form of affectively-charged motivation), and the reasons one would think of to motivate their PA when faced with alternatives with varying levels of temptingness. RESULTS:In less tempting scenarios, intrinsic motivation was positively associated with selection of affective reasons (Study 1). In more tempting scenarios, instrumental reasons were generally selected, although the specific type of reason differed based on intrinsic motivation (Study 2). CONCLUSION:Findings suggest that instrumental reasons, which motivate behavior through reflective processes, may be particularly important for people when faced with highly tempting alternatives or if they do not find PA to be intrinsically rewarding. More research is needed to determine whether these patterns of motive selection effectively facilitate behavior.

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the 'Save PDF' action button.

Food choices determine the nutrients and other substances that build and maintain our bodies as well as consumer demand for food products. People choose specific foods, and those choices are strongly influenced by many factors. Our goal was to examine the reasons participants gave for choosing each of the foods they consumed during a 4-week study, how those influencers differed for different food classes, and whether the influencers predicted satisfaction with their dietary variety.Participants maintained a 28-day online food diary. Each week, they rated their satisfaction with the variety in their diets and the impact of 13 choice influencers on each of the foods they consumed. We recorded the frequency at which each choice influencer was rated as having high, moderate, low, or no impact on selection. We grouped each food into one of 17 food classes to weigh the importance of each influencers for consuming each of these food classes.Liking, hunger, and convenience were most frequently selected as having a high impact on food choice. The presence on a menu, only thing served, and special occasion were most frequently selected as having no impact on food choice. Liking was generally the highest rated choice influencer across food classes. Liking had high to moderate impact on the consumption of healthier food classes such as the fruits and vegetable classes at similar proportions as less healthy food classes such as the alcohol and desserts classes.Satisfaction with weekly variety was best predicted by liking; convenience generally reduced satisfaction.

Healthcare providers regularly give weight-related advice (e.g., behavioral weight loss counseling) to patients with higher weight (BMI >= 30 kg/m2). The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends this practice on the basis that behavioral weight-related advice can motivate patients to attempt weight loss; however, it is also possible that this advice has adverse consequences (e.g., negative psychological reactions). In this study, we examined people's reported reactions to a recent experience of receiving weight-related advice from a healthcare provider. U.S. adults (N = 189) with higher weight who reported having received weight-related advice completed an online survey via Prolific. They answered questions about their most recent experience of receiving weight-related advice, including the purpose of the visit, characteristics of their provider, and characteristics of the advice itself. They also provided demographic information and indicated their trust in healthcare providers and the healthcare system. 90.5% of participants (n = 171) reported having one of three types of reactions to their provider's weight-related advice. Participants (1) felt motivated to change their behaviors and weight; (2) felt bad or guilty about their behaviors and weight; or (3) felt both motivated to change and bad or guilty. Using chi-square tests of independence and one-way ANOVAs, we examined how various participant characteristics and characteristics of the visit, provider, and advice itself differed across these three groups. We found significant demographic differences across the groups and found that a disproportionate amount of people in the "motivated" group reported having requested the weight-related advice and having had a two-way discussion about weight with their provider. Whereas some people feel motivated after receiving weight-related advice from a healthcare provider, others are left feeling bad about themselves or ambivalent. Understanding these varied reactions may provide insights into how healthcare providers can deliver advice that is motivating without eliciting negative psychological reactions.

Objective. Weight gain was common during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, potentially creating a new descriptive norm about weight gain. The unique context of a global pandemic may have influenced situational attributions for weight gain that were not typical prior to the pandemic. We examined the effects of the new norm on people's views about responsibility and blame for weight gain. Methods. In two preregistered surveys, we aimed to manipulate the salience of weight gain during COVID-19, and measured views about responsibility and blame for weight gain. Results. Among participants who gained weight, the more common they perceived weight gain to be, the more they felt their own weight gain was understandable (b = 0.09, se = 0.04, p = 0.02), but perceived commonness didn't relate to their feelings of responsibility and blame for weight gain. For participants who didn't gain weight, the perceived commonness of weight gain was associated with less blame towards people who gained weight (b = 0.11, se= 1.46, p = 0.044), but not with responsibility for weight gain. Conclusion. Participants believed weight gain was common during COVID, but this descriptive norm had mixed associations with attributions for one's own and others' weight gain.

Many individuals struggle to regulate their own consumption of food. Beginning with general theories of self-control, we review psychological factors that have been shown to influence the regulation of eating, including those related to particular personality variables, such as external eating, restrained eating, and reward sensitivity, as well as situational constraints, including normative influences, emotions, and calorie deprivation. Strategies for the self-control of eating, including reappraisal, effortful inhibition, and various automatic strategies are also reviewed, along with a discussion of the strengths and limitations of historical and contemporary psychological studies investigating food consumption. Whereas extensive examinations of food preferences and body weight have appeared in the psychological literature, we call for more robust research that prioritizes actual eating as the primary dependent measure.

Although average body size in the U.S. has increased in recent decades, stigma directed at individuals with higher weight has not diminished. In this study, we explored this phenomenon by investigating the relationship between people’s perceived social norms regarding higher weight and their reported levels of weight bias (i.e., anti-fat attitudes). Our predictions for perceived social norms drew on the concepts of intergroup contact and ingroup favoritism, which were also probed in this study. We hypothesized that both greater descriptive norms and more favorable injunctive norms regarding higher weight would be associated with lower reported weight bias. Individuals’ quantity and quality of social contact with people with higher weight were also predicted to be associated with lower weight bias. Finally, we predicted that individuals who perceived themselves as heavier would display ingroup favoritism (i.e., report less weight bias). Participants (N = 272) from the United States completed a set of online questionnaires about their perceived social norms, social contact with people with higher weight, and explicit weight bias. We found support for each of these pre-registered predictions (ps < 0.03), and post hoc analyses revealed that quality, but not quantity, of social contact with individuals with higher weight was an important predictor of lower weight bias. Together, these findings provide insight into the social psychology of weight bias and help to lay a theoretical foundation for future efforts to reduce weight stigma.

Physical activity (PA) produces various outcomes, including affective responses and instrumental benefits (e.g., weight loss, health). Theories of behavioral maintenance suggest that decisions to continue PA engagement will depend on one’s satisfaction with received outcomes. Thus, this study was designed to test how different combinations of affective and instrumental outcomes influence motivation, intentions, and subsequent PA behavior over a two-week study period. Participants with weight loss goals (N = 119) were provided an exercise video that was designed to manipulate their affect while exercising (positive vs. neutral) and their beliefs about the video’s instrumentality for weight loss (instrumental vs. not). Self-report measures assessed participants’ affect while exercising, instrumental beliefs that the video would produce weight loss, and motivation and intention to exercise with the video for two weeks. After two weeks, participants reported their video use. Because initial pre-registered analyses revealed that the video manipulation did not produce a difference in affect, a regression-based approach was implemented to examine whether variability in self-reported affect while exercising and beliefs about the video’s effect on weight loss predicted motivation, intentions, and video use during the two-week study period. Reports of more favorable affect were positively associated with motivation and video use, regardless of instrumental beliefs. For those reporting less favorable affect, strong instrumental beliefs appeared to bolster motivation, but had an adverse effect on video use. Findings provide insight into how different types of PA outcomes might influence motivation and continued behavioral engagement.

Individuals fail to suppress certain thoughts, especially under conditions that tax cognitive resources. We investigated the impact of modifying psychological reactance pressures on thought suppression attempts. Participants were asked to suppress thoughts of a target item under standard experimental conditions or under conditions designed to lower reactance pressures. In the presence of high cognitive load, weakening associated reactance pressures resulted in greater success at suppression. The results suggest that reducing relevant motivational pressures can facilitate thought suppression, even when an individual experiences cognitive limitation.

The COVID-19 pandemic has extensively changed the state of psychological science from what research questions psychologists can ask to which methodologies psychologists can use to investigate them. In this article, we offer a perspective on how to optimize new research in the pandemic’s wake. Because this pandemic is inherently a social phenomenon—an event that hinges on human-to-human contact—we focus on socially relevant subfields of psychology. We highlight specific psychological phenomena that have likely shifted as a result of the pandemic and discuss theoretical, methodological, and practical considerations of conducting research on these phenomena. After this discussion, we evaluate metascientific issues that have been amplified by the pandemic. We aim to demonstrate how theoretically grounded views on the COVID-19 pandemic can help make psychological science stronger—not weaker—in its wake.