By Katherine Harmon
(Click here for the original article)
SAN ANTONIO, Texas—Eating might seem, principally, like a simple, primal act. We get hungry; we eat; we’re full. But surprising new research suggests that our habits, previous experiences, and our desire to conform to social norms helps determine not only how much we eat, but also how full we feel later on. The findings were , presented September 24 at the Obesity Society Annual Scientific Meeting in San Antonio, Texas.
As research about portion and serving-plate size shows, we are inclined to finish what is in front of us—and to serve enough food to fill much of their plates. But to effectively address the obesity problem we need to be thinking even more deeply about the psychology of eating, argued Jeff Brunstrom of the University of Bristol.
Whether we realize it or not, we tend to have different feelings of satiety depending on how much—and what—we perceive to have eaten. For instance, one study found that if you give study subjects smoothies with identical amounts of fruit but tell some people it had more fruit and others it had less, those who thought they had consumed more will continue to report feeling fuller a few hours later. Similar effects have been seen if you give people the same food but call it a “meal” for some and a “snack” for others or label it “high-calorie” for some and “low-calorie” for others.
These external influences all affect what Brunstrom calls “expected satiety,” or how much we anticipate a certain food will fill us up. And this is where previous experience plays an important role. “How do we decide how many calories to put on our plates?” Brustrom asked. “That’s a very complicated question,” he noted, but “memory and portion size are closely related.” As an example, he suggests thinking of how full you might expect to feel after eating 100 calories of chocolate versus 100 calories of a baked potato. Although they each technically have the same energy content, chances are we would expect different levels of fullness from each.
To better understand how people make these often-unconscious judgments, he and his colleagues ran an experiment asking subjects to view two side-by-side pictures of food items on identical plates. The food portion on the left, say slices of pizza, remained static, while the food item on the right, say chicken tikka masala, slowly increased in size until the participant said that they would expect to feel about the same level of fullness after eating either plate. The researchers found that the simple volume of food on the plates was important in determining expected fullness. But volume didn’t tell the whole story. Another factor, especially for children but also for adults, is familiarity. “We expect novel foods to confer relatively little satiation until experience teaches us otherwise,” Brunstrom explained.
He argues that all of our tens of thousands of previous meals have “taught” us about what to expect at mealtime, both in terms of portion size and in terms of how full we will be afterward. So if we can re-learn to serve smaller portions for meals and to pick nutritious foods that will leave us feeling satisfied afterward, we might be able to reprogram our automatic eating behaviors.
Another way to improve food size selection is to play on our deep-seated desire for social conformity, noted Jason Riis, of the Harvard Business School. “We’re very sensitive to social norms,” he said, noting examples that when people know most other people are doing things, whether being an organ donor or reusing hotel towels for the duration of their stay, they are much more likely to engage in that behavior, too.
A simple trip to a chain restaurant will often show most other diners devouring portions that are much too large and calorie-heavy than would be recommended for a healthful diet. But very rarely do people explicitly request smaller portions. Riis and his colleagues have completed studies at Panda Express, a chain Asian fast food restaurant, showing that customers will often accept an offer to reduce the size of a calorie-filled side dish (such as rice) to cut more than 200 calories out of their meal (some also received a small discount on the meal for doing so). The offer was much more successful than menu calorie labeling at getting customers to eat lower-calorie lunches.
This downsizing option, modeled off of the infamous “supersize” era of McDonald’s meal upsells, has yet to catch on outside of the experimental realm. But Riis hopes that calling these more appropriately proportioned portions “right-size”—or something to that effect—will eventually “become part of the standard script” at restaurants “so you don’t feel like a weirdo” having to ask for a smaller helping. It would take a lot of work and adjustment, he noted, but “changing defaults to smaller portions” could make a big difference in how much we end up consuming when we go out to eat—which could also translate to more healthful portions at home, too.
Also on HuffPost:
Use A Bigger Fork
A study published in the <em>Journal of Consumer Research</em> shows that restaurant-goers who <a href="http://www.jcr-admin.org/files/pressPDFs/071311193612_mishra.pdf" target="_hplink">eat with really big forks</a> (20 percent bigger than a normal fork you'd find at a restaurant) eat less food and leave more on their plates than people who eat with really small forks. A possible explanation for this finding is that when people use small forks to eat, they feel like they are not making any big <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/07/15/using-a-big-fork-may-help-you-eat-less/?xid=huffpo-direct" target="_hplink">progress in eating their meal</a> and quelling their hunger pangs, <em>TIME</em> reported. In addition, the restaurant-goers who ate with the smaller forks and were given bigger portions of food at much more food than if they just had the smaller forks or if they just had the bigger portions.
Eat From A Smaller Bowl
Research from the Georgia Institute of Technology shows that people eat 31 percent more ice cream when they eat out of a 34-ounce bowl, rather than 17-ounce one, ScienceDaily reported. Researchers explained that's because people eat about 92 percent of what they serve themselves -- so if you <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/08/060803082602.htm" target="_hplink">serve yourself more, you'll eat more</a>.
Get Some Sleep
Columbia University researchers found that <a href="http://www.thirdage.com/news/sleep-deprivation-may-increase-hunger_3-26-2011" target="_hplink">sleep deprivation can also lead to more calories consumed</a>. They found that women who only got 4 hours sleep the night before ate 329 more calories in a nine-hour period compared with if they weren't sleep deprived, while men ate 263 more calories when <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-michael-j-breus/sleep-more-lose-weight_b_857080.html" target="_hplink">sleep-deprived</a>. "It has an impact on cognitive restraint," study researcher Marie-Pierre St. Onge told ThirdAge. "High-fat food is tempting, and maybe on <a href="http://www.thirdage.com/news/sleep-deprivation-may-increase-hunger_3-26-2011" target="_hplink">short sleep you can't restrain yourself</a> as well, while on full sleep you can resist more easily."
Mind Your Environment
<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/02/mindless-eating-environment-location_n_945712.html" target="_hplink">WHERE you eat your food</a> could also factor in to how much you eat and whether you're eating food even though you're not hungry, according to research from the University of Southern California. Researchers had movie-goers say whether they were regular popcorn-eaters or not, and then they had them eat either stale popcorn or freshly popped popcorn. The regular popcorn-eaters ate just as much stale popcorn as fresh popcorn, while people who didn't consider themselves regular popcorn-eaters ate significantly less stale popcorn than fresh since it didn't taste as good. "The results show just how <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/02/mindless-eating-environment-location_n_945712.html" target="_hplink">powerful our environment can be</a> in triggering unhealthy behavior," study researcher David Neal said in a statement. "Sometimes willpower and good intentions are not enough, and we need to trick our brains by controlling the environment instead."
Hide The Junk Food
Research from Cornell University shows that we are three times more likely to <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/29/see-first-eat-visible-food_n_984004.html" target="_hplink">eat the first thing that we see</a>, compared with the fifth thing we see. In that study, researchers took photographs of 100 kitchen cupboards and asked the owners to keep records of what they ate. Researchers also tried moving the food around in the cupboards to see if that impacted their food choices -- and found that it did. The research shows that "we end up being masters of our own demise, to some extent," study researcher Professor Brian Wansink, Ph.D., author of "Mindless Eating: Why We Eat More Than We Think," told HuffPost.
Eat Using Your Non-Dominant Hand
Research published in the <em>Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin</em> shows that <a href="http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/20/overeating-which-hand-are-you-using/" target="_hplink">eating with your non-dominant hand</a> can help you to decrease the amount of food you consume, CNN reported. The finding was part of the same movie-theater/popcorn study, where it was discovered that environment plays a part in mindless eating. Like in that experiment, researchers gave study participants either fresh or stale popcorn. They found that people who used their non-dominant hands and ate the stale popcorn ate 30 percent less than if they used their dominant hands, CNN reported.
How to Avoid Mindless Eating
Food Think with Wansink: Economy-size snacks can cause you to eat more