Food Psychology: Why we eat more

than we thinkJim Painter PhD RD

California Raisin Marketing BoardProfessor Eastern Illinois University

Obesity Trends

Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1990

(*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)

Percent of Adult Females that are Obese by Country

3.4% Philippines5% Switzerland 5.6% Thailand 6.7% Singapore8% Malaysia 8% Tunisia 8.3% Cuba 9.9% Italy 10% Norway10.3 Brazil 11% Netherlands12% Sweden 13% Belgium 13.7% Canada 14% Spain 15% Mauritius 15% Iceland 15% Denmark(WHO, 2003)

16% Ireland16% Slovakia 16.4% Peru 17% Austria17% Latvia 17% France 17% Lithuania 18% New Zealand 18% Uruguay 18.5% Australia 19% Yugoslavia 19% Finland 20% Germany 20.9% Israel 21% Portugal 21% Hungary 21% Colombia 23% Romania 23% Scotland 23% Chile 23.5% England

25% Russia 25.1% Mexico 25.4% Argentina 26% Oman 26% Czech Republic 28% Greece 29.4% S. Africa 30% Iran 31.5% Jamaica 34% Bahrain 34% US 35.7% Paraguay 36% Curacao 36% Malta 36.5 Panama 40% Lebanon 40% Trinidid and Tobago 41% Kuwait 43.4% French Polynesia 66.3% Samoa American 74.3% Samoa -urban

Gary Foster Penn State ADA

Are poor food choices the cause?

Why are Americans gaining weight

• I. Lack of exercise• II. Sedentary lifestyles• III. Stress/pressure • IV. Advertising• V. Genetic• VI. Deep emotional needs, DR Phil• VII. Haven’t found the right diet

Premise for today!• We lose track of how much we are eating

Historical GlanceFood/Bev Introductio

n Size at intro(oz)

2002 sizes

Budweiser 1936 7.0 7,12,22,40

Hershey bar

1908 0.6 1.6,2.6,4.0 7.0,8.0

BK fry 1954 2.6 2.6,4.1,5.7 6.9

McD burger

1955 1.6 1.6,3.2,4.0 8.0

Soda-BK 1954 12.0, 16.0 12.0,16.0, 22.0,32.0 42.0

Young & Nestle, 2003. JADA Expanding Portion Sizes in the us Marketplace. (231-234)

Then and Now…Bagel

• 20 years ago• 3 in diameter• 140 calories

• Today• 350 calories

Then and Now…Burger• 20 years ago• 333 calories

• Today• 590 calories

• Monster Burger• 1420 calories

• Web video• video

Then and now…Fries

• 20 years ago• 2.4 oz• 210 calories

• Today• 6.9 oz• 610 calories

From the monster to the Riley burger

From Riley to

more madness

Then and Now…Spaghetti

• 20 years ago• 1 C. pasta-sauce

w/ 3 meatballs• 500 calories• Today• 2 C. pasta-sauce

w/3 meatballs• 1,025 calories

Value Marketing

• More for less money• “Combo Meal”• “Value Meal”• Increases company profits• We spend a little extra for larger portions• We feel we’ve gotten a deal• Is it of value to get more• of something you didn’t need in the first place

Value Meals• McDonald’s Quarter Pounder• Regular vs. value meal= 660 kcal

• Wendy’s Double w/cheese• Regular vs. Combo meal= 600

kcal

• Burger King Whopper• Regular vs. value meal= 590 kcal

• 1 daily value meal = 1#/wk = 52#/yr = 3,570#

Calorie Comparison-7-Eleven

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Gulp Big Gulp Super Big Double

Other Trends

• Nestle Toll House cookies• recipe yields 60 vs. 100 when written in 1949

• Portion size me

• Web video

Super Size Me Documentaries

CBS Features Portion Size Me

video

II. Size and Shape of Containers

• General Finding About Package Size . . .

• Study 1. Package Size• Study 2. Portion Size• Study 3. Serving Shapes • Study 4. Shape Study #2

Package Size Increases Consumption

• People who pour from larger containers eat more than those pouring from small

• Consistent across 47 of 48 categories

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

"Small-x" "Medium-2x" "Large 3x"

SpagettiCrisco OilM&Ms

General Finding:Package Size Can

Double Consumption

Wansink, Brian (1996), ŅCan Package Size Accelerate Usage Vo lume?ÓJournal of Marketing, Vo l. 60:3 (July), 1-14.

Hungry for Some Stale Movie Popcorn?

• General Question• Does portion size effect

consumption?

• The Field Study (Chicago, IL)

• 2x2 Design• Large vs. X-Large Popcorn (pre-weighed)• Fresh vs. 10-day-old Popcorn

Wansink, Brian and SeaBum Park (2001), ŅAt the Movies: How External Cues andPerceived Taste Impact Consumption Vo lume,Ó Food Quality and Preference, 12:1(January), 69-74.

We Eat Much More from Big Containers

– People eat 45-50% more from extra-large popcorn containers

– They still eat 40-45% more with stale popcorn

Grams Eaten

Wansink, Brian and SeaBum Park (2001), ŅAt the Movies: How External Cues andPerceived Taste Impact Consumption Vo lume,Ó Food Quality and Preference, 12:1(January), 69-74.

0102030405060708090

100

LargeBucket

Extra-LargeBucket

Fresh

10 DaysOld

Do Peripheral Cues Influence Experts with Precise Target Volumes?

48 Philadelphia bartenders

• Given 4 tall, slender (highball) glasses or 4 short, wide (tumbler) glasses

• Given 4 full 1500 ml bottles and asked to pour …

• Split in to . . . • Less than 5 years

experience• More than 5 years

experience

Pour gin for gin & tonicPour rum for rum & CokePour vodka for vodka tonicPour whiskey for

whiskey/rocks

HighballGlass

Tumbler

Wansink, Brian and Koert van Ittersum (2003), ŅBottoms Up! Peripheral Cues andConsumption Vo lume,Ó Journal of Consumer Research. December, forthcoming.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

TallHighball

Glass

ShortTumbler

Glass

oz

“When in Philadelphia, Should I Ask for a Tumbler

or a Highball Glass?”• Bartenders poured 28% more alcohol into tumblers than highball glasses

• Experience doesn’t eliminate bias

Wansink, Brian and Koert van Ittersum (2003), “Bottoms Up! Peripheral Cues and Consumption Volume,” Journal of Consumer Research. December, forthcoming.

< 5 years

5+ years

III. The effect of visibility and convenience on dietary

consumption

Gas stations, remember when someone else pumped the gasFast food, remember when you had to go in

Amount of Candy Consumption According to

Condition

Painter, J., Wansink, B., Hieggelki, J. (2002). How Visibility and Convenience Influence Candy Consumption. Appetite 38, 237-238.

0123456789

10

on desk in desk 2 metersfrom desk

Number of candies

consumed

on deskin desk2 meters from desk

Increase Intake when food is Visible

(on desk)

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

45.00%

Grapes

Chocolate

carrots

pretzels

Painter, j., Snyder, J., Rhodes, K., Deisher, C. 2008. The Effect of Visibility and Accessibility of Food on Dietary Intake.Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 108, 9. p A93.

Accessibility and Visibility of Raisins

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Drawer (5) Desk (5) Desk (10)

Placement and Portions of Raisins

Avera

ge C

on

su

mp

tion

of

Rais

in B

oxes

Raisins Bags

20% ↑

37.5% ↑

Gaydosh, B., & Painter, J. (2010). The effect of visibility and quantity of raisins on dietary intake, a pilot study. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 110(9): A32. DOI: 10.1016/j.jada.2010.06.117.

IV. The effect of calorie density on satiety & consumption

Effect of snack preloads on satiety and consumption

• At the pizza meal, there was a trend for lower FI after raisins compared to water (p < 0.09).

• However, snack (kcal) + pizza (kcal) intake was 13% lower after raisins and water compared to either grapes or the mixed snack (p < 0.04)

• Satiety was higher after raisins compared to water (p = 0.01)

• In contrast to other healthy snacks like grapes or the mixed snack, raisins increase satiety but not cumulative energy intake in children

Cumulative Energy intake

Control Grapes Raisins Mix0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

58

62

50

67

35

Desire to eat (change in appetite per kilocalorie of the snack) after grapes

was lowest during the study measurement period with all other snacks.

Raisins was second.

V. Can Labels Change the Taste of Foods?

• Study 1. Descriptive Labels in the Cafeteria

Menu Items Used

• Red beans & rice• Seafood filet• Grilled chicken• Chicken Parmesan• Chocolate Pudding• Zucchini cookies

• Traditional Cajun Red beans & rice

• Succulent Italian Seafood filet

• Tender Grilled chicken• Home-style Chicken

Parmesan• Satin Dutch Chocolate

Pudding• Grandma’s Zucchini cookies

“Well, I know what I like” --> Maybe Not

• People evaluate descriptive foods as more favorable

Wansink, Brian, James M. Painter, and Koert van Ittersum, (2001) ŅDescriptive MenuLabelsÕ Effect on Sales,Ó Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administrative Quarterly, 42:6(December), 68-72.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Plain Descriptive

Taste

Texture

Calories

Results: Effects are Less Strong with Desserts

Taste

No Label Label

Desserts

Main & Side Dishes

VI Visual cues

1. Ice cream2. Soup

Do We Put More into Big Containers?

• Subjects were give bowls (17oz or 34oz) and serving spoons of different sizes

• They serves themselves as much as they desired

Ounces Eaten

Wansink, B. Van Ittersum, K. Painter, J. (2006), “Ice Cream Illusions; Bowls, Spoons, and Self Serve Portions” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 31:3, 240-243.

0123456789

10

small Large

Refillable Soup Bowls Increase Consumption, but Not Perception of Consumption

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

No

rma

l

So

up

Bo

wls

Re

fill

ab

le

So

up

Bo

wls

Calo

ries

Actual CaloriesConsumed

Estimated CaloriesConsumed

Wansink, B., Painter, JE., North, J. 2005. Bottomless Bowls: Why Visual Cues of PortionSize May Influence Intake. Obesity Research, 13,1, 93-100.

VII. The effect of food selection on satiety & consumption

© 2012 Institute of Food Technologists 44

Snack intake (kcal) was lowest after grapes

and highest after cookies, compared with all

other snacks.

Grapes Raisins Potato Chips Cookies0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Calories Consumed

Calories Consumed

AA

B

C

Cumulative energy intake was lowest after grapes and highest after cookies, compared

to all other snacks.

© 2012 Institute of Food Technologists 45

Grapes Raisins Potato Chips

Cookies0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Cumulative Food Intake

Cumulative Food Intake

AB B

A

Raisins and Energy Levels• In paired comparisons of daily energy

scores between raisins and granola , raisins had higher energy scores than granola on 13 of the 14 days.

• This occurrence of higher energy scores with raisins over granola was statistically significant (p=0.002)

Raisins and Running

47

• Research conducted at the University of California – Davis & published in the Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition

• Eating raisins provides the same workout boost as sports chews

• Runners that ingested raisins or sports chews ran their 5k on average one minute faster than those that consumed only water.

Sports and Raisin Conclusion

48

• Both Raisins and Sports Jelly Beans are effective sources of fuel in the later stages of prolonged endurance exercise.

• Raisins are a natural, great tasting, cost-effective CHO alternative to commercial SJBs that can be used during moderate- to high-intensity endurance exercise.

Solution

• Self monitoring• Know what you are eating• Track what you are eating

Efficacy of self monitoring

Efficacy of self monitoring

MyFitnessPal

MyFitnessPal

Conclusion• Shape of container determines consumption• Visibility influences consumption

• Visibility of raisins increases consumption• Satiety levels of foods influence consumption

• Pre-meal snack of raisins decreases overall consumption• Food names effect consumption• Visual cues to satiation influence consumption• Choose correct form of food

• Raisins result in greater satiety than cookies• Raisins produce higher energy levels than granola

• Track what you consume