Red Mountain Spa
Some of the most fascinating, and potentially useful research in the battle of obesity is being conducted by Dr. Brian Wansink, Director of the University of Illinois's Food and Brand Lab. Wansink, the University's Julian Simon Research Scholar and Professor of Marketing, Nutritional Science, and Consumer Economics, has been attempting to clarify basic Homo sapiens behavior as it relates to food intake.
Last week, I received my monthly issue of the Nutrition Action Healthletter - a newsletter of the Center for Science in the Public Interest*. The featured article, "Food Illusions - Why We Eat More Than We Think", was about Professor Wansink and his research. I couldn't put it down. Although most of us know that bigger portions result in more food consumed, the reason, claims Wansink, is more than a clean-your-plate mentality. His research digs deeper, giving us a glimpse of the underlying human psychology that affects both eating and non-food-related behavior. For example:
Unconsciously, Larger Portions Make Us Eat More
In one experiment, moviegoers in Chicago were given either medium or large buckets of popcorn. As expected, the group that was given more popcorn ate more (approx. 50% more). However, when quizzed as to how much total popcorn they had consumed (volume and calories), there was no difference between the two groups! Apparently, most of us are aware of what we are eating, without regard to quality, but have definitive (albeit frequently incorrect) ingrained perceptions of how much we consume.
To demonstrate how completely mindless many of us are when eating, Wansink et al repeated the same popcorn experiment in a Philadelphia movie theatre, this time using stale, 14-day-old popcorn. The result: moviegoers receiving the jumbo bucket ate 31% more than those receiving the smaller container.
Consuming More from Larger Portions Involves More than a Parentally Imprinted Clean-Your-Plate Mentality
In another project, three groups of volunteers were sent home with a videotape (to watch) and M&M's to snack on. Group 1 received 1/2 lb of M&M's, Group 2 - 1 lb, and Group 3 - 2 lbs. At the end of the video, researchers stopped by the participants' homes to pick up the video and uneaten M&M's. Those given the 1/2 lb bag consumed an average of 63 M&M's. The group given the 1 lb bag ate nearly twice that (120 M&M's per person), while those given the 2 lb bag ate even more. That's a lot of candy to consume in 1-2 hours. It's uncomfortable. For people to consume more from larger portions, even when it's uncomfortable, has to involve more than childhood preconditioning. (Per Wansink on the serving sizes: "No one can finish that large a bag of M&M's without needing insulin".)
The Wansink group suspects that the size of a portion or container sends consumers a subconscious cue as to what is acceptable, or normal, i.e. we are conditioned to react in a normal, acceptable fashion by eating more from larger portions. We are not preconditioned to eat less when more is available.
In still another experiment, consumers were given either a large or medium box of spaghetti. Beforehand, Wansink removed spaghetti from the larger box so that it contained the same amount as in the medium box. Because of the clever experimental design, the investigators were able to demonstrate greater usage of spaghetti from the large box. In still other research, the apparent, human inclination to use more from larger portions has been demonstrated with pet food, plant food, and non-food items.
People Are Unaware of When They Eat More
Imagine this: A soup bowl that magically refills itself. That's what the Wansink team devised in a University of Illinois cafeteria - a soup bowl permanently affixed to a table top, tubing running from the bottom of the bowl to a hot pot of soup, all cleverly disguised and undetectable to student volunteers. As the students consumed soup, the bowl would partially refill itself, unnoticed. Women consumed about 30% more soup, men 40% more, than the actual volume of the bowl. Yet, compared to students who consumed the same soup from non-refillable bowls, there was no difference in perception between the two groups as to total soup ingested.
We Eat More If Food is Visible and Within Our Reach
In yet another "study", Wansink collaborators asked UI secretaries if they would be willing to fill out a questionnaire on candy consumption. Those who volunteered were rewarded with a covered dish of 30 Hershey's Kisses. Nightly, the scientists would return to the secretaries' desks, count the number of Kisses eaten, and refill the dishes. If the candy was visible (clear bowl), the secretaries ate 9 candies per day. If served in an opaque bowl and lid, consumption dropped to 6 1/2 Kisses. If the bowls (clear or opaque) were placed 6 feet away from the desks (requiring standing up and taking 3 steps), consumption decreased to 4 candies per day.
A similar experiment was conducted with healthy food (i.e. baby carrots) rendering identical results: more food was eaten within arms reach. They also found that bigger bowls of baby carrots resulted in greater consumption.
Other Discoveries
Higher priced all-you-can-eat buffets get lower food quality ratings from patrons
Paying more = eating more = more discomfort = lower restaurant rating.
We consume more from short, wide containers than those that are tall and slender
In 2 separate studies - one on kids in a weight-loss camp (taught to be portion-conscious) and another on 48 Philadelphia bartenders, participants were asked to pour out a given amount of breakfast drink (kids) or gin (bartenders) into either a tall or squatty container - both being the same size. Everyone poured more into the short, wide glasses (77% more for the kids, 26% more from the bartenders).
Stockpiling large quantities of food causes us to (temporarily) eat more
Buying a large volume of one item increases "stock pressure" - an ingrained psychological impetus to eat more (of the item) until inventory is reduced.
Foods requiring preparation are eaten less
Inconvenience = lesser consumption.
Variety causes greater consumption
Having unlimited access to a large variety of foods (as opposed to 1 or 2) causes people to eat more total food.
The perception of variety causes greater consumption
Greater intakes occur if foods are mixed (stews, casseroles, candy mixes) rather than being offered individually.
In supermarkets, suggestions to buy specific amounts of a particular item will increase sales, even when no deals are offered.
People can be subconsciously influenced by numbers to buy more - a phenomenon known as "anchoring".
Restaurant menus can positively influence our satisfaction with a dish even before we consume it
Menu items with appetite-stimulating descriptions are always rated higher (after consumption) than the same items listed generically. Example: "Bavarian Black Forest Double Chocolate Cake" vs. "Chocolate Cake".
Selling Healthier Eating: The Right Comparisons Yield Positive Outcomes
Wansink suggests that an easier way to eat healthy is for nutritionists and dieticians to help imprint positive new messages about the pleasures of health-focused eating. How? Use comparisons of good to bad food -emphasizing differences (when the choices are similar) and similarities (when the choices are dissimilar). For example, a granola bar is kind of like a candy bar - they come in similar sized packages, they're about the same size, they're sweet and have a remotely similar texture. In this case, the way to sell the granola bar is to emphasize the differences - "it's got oatmeal, it will last you longer, it won't spoil your dinner". If, however, the healthy choice is an apple (which is very unlike the candy bar), the strategy for selling is reversed, i.e. emphasize the similarities - "an apple is really sweet, it's refreshing, it's fun to eat".
Bottom Line
Dr. Walsink reminds us that dieting for weight loss or other health reasons requires an enormous amount of personal energy - hundreds of daily decisions and dozens of battles of will power over black-listed temptations. He suggests that by simply adjusting our environment, we may significantly decrease our caloric consumption. Assuming the validity of Walsink's work (he has published), many of us may be able to shed an extra 10-20 lbs over the next year by rearranging our surroundings, and being "aware" during eating (or serving) - a successful practice, called "Mindful Eating", taught by Red Mountain Psychologist, Dr. David Tate. Specifically, consider the following:
. Avoid all-you-can eat buffets, especially the pricey ones. Most people tend to eat more resulting in a less than optimum dining experience. Instead, opt for restaurants where you may pay a little more, portions are modest, and food quality is high. And, be on-guard for appetite-stimulating menu adjectives.
. Keep food out of your reach. This would apply not only to snacks but meals, as well. If getting seconds requires getting up from the table (and walking to the stove or countertop), lesser calories are apt to be consumed than when food is within our reach on the dining room table.
. Keep food out of site - in pantries or in covered dishes.
. Beware of big purchases (bulk) of single food items. Wansink's research demonstrates an inclination to consume much more during the first few days or weeks that we have it. If possible, store bulk purchases in the basement or garage.
. As much as possible, avoid ready-to-eat foods. The effort required for preparation reduces total caloric intake over the long run.
. For new glassware purchases, opt for the tall, slender type. By using tall containers, we believe we are consuming more and are less apt to over-consume.
. Use known-volume scoops, like in restaurants, to keep portions from becoming excessive.
. Beware of "anchoring" in supermarkets. Numerical suggestions to purchase more genuinely work. We buy more. And, as Wansink's research demonstrates, we initially eat more of the food purchased in quantity.
. When in a personal battle of what to eat for snacks, do not attempt to convince yourself to eat healthier because it's right, or responsible. Eating has to be pleasurable. For fruit snacks, focus on the similarities to favorite sweet treats - sweetness (obviously), texture, juiciness, fun to eat, etc. If the snack is a sports bar, multigrain muffin - which is similar to a favorite forbidden morsel - sell yourself on the healthier choice by concentrating on the non-health advantages (includes a favorite grain, sweetened with apple juice, etc.).
* Nutrition Action Healthletter is a publication of the Center for Science in the Public Interest,1875 Connecticut Ave., Washington, DC 20009. Website: http://www.cspinet.org/.
|
|
 |
Nutrition
Latest Headlines |
|
