Ironic processes in the eating behaviour of restrained eaters
Ironic processes in the eating behaviour of restrained eaters
复制标题
DOI：
10.1348/135910702169303
复制
发表时间：
2002-02-01
影响因子：
7.9
通讯作者：
Ijntema, R
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Boon, B;Stroebe, W;Ijntema, R
理论本研究探讨的过程中潜在的抑制进食者的饮食行为的负性情绪。基于赫尔曼和波利维（1984）的边界模型和韦格纳（1994）的反讽过程理论，提出了有限能力假说，认为限制进食者的暴饮暴食是认知能力限制的结果。预测是：（1）在进食过程中认知能力的损害会导致限制性进食者暴饮暴食，但不会导致不受限制的进食者暴饮暴食;（2）这种差异只会出现在被认为热量高的食物中。在一项实验中，假设进行了测试，2（限制/无限制）× 2（分心是/否）× 2（感知卡路里高/低）的设计，其中受试者在口味测试的情况下食用冰淇淋。冰淇淋消费量为因变量。一个二阶的相互作用被发现：正如预测的那样，在高热量的条件下，限制进食者在不分心的情况下与不受限制的进食者吃同样的量，但在分心的情况下要多得多。分心也有一个意想不到的主要影响，这表明限制和不受限制的进食者在分心时比不分心时吃得更多。限制、分心、感知热量的交互作用可以用反讽过程理论和边界模型来解释，并且有限能力假说似乎得到了证实。分心的总体主要效果仍然令人困惑。后一种效果提供了两种推测性的观点。
Theory. The present study examines the processes underlying the disinhibition of the eating behaviour of restrained eaters following negative emotions. Based on Herman and Polivy's (1984) Boundary Model and Wegner's Ironic Process Theory (1994), the limited capacity hypothesis is formulated, suggesting that overeating in restrained eaters results from cognitive capacity limitations. Predictions were that (1) impairment of cognitive capacity during eating will lead to overeating in restrained but not in unrestrained eaters and that (2) this difference should only emerge with food perceived to be high in calories.Method. The hypotheses were tested in an experiment with a 2 (restrained/unrestrained)x2 (distraction yes/no)x2 (perceived calories high/low) design, in which subjects consumed ice-cream in a taste test situation. Ice-cream consumption was the dependent variable.Results. A second-order interaction was found: as predicted, in the high calorie condition restrained eaters ate the same amount as unrestrained eaters when not distracted, but considerably more when distracted. There was also an unexpected main effect of distraction, which indicated that restrained as well as unrestrained eaters ate more if distracted than if not distracted.Discussion. The restraint x distraction x perceived calories interaction can be explained by both the Ironic Process Theory and the Boundary Model; and the limited capacity hypothesis appears to be confirmed. The overall main effect of distraction remains puzzling. Two speculative views for the latter effect are offered.