Cargando…
Effects of go/no-go training on food-related action tendencies, liking and choice
Inhibitory control training effects on behaviour (e.g. ‘healthier’ food choices) can be driven by changes in affective evaluations of trained stimuli, and theoretical models indicate that changes in action tendencies may be a complementary mechanism. In this preregistered study, we investigated the...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Royal Society
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8385366/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34457346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.210666 |
_version_ | 1783742078092574720 |
---|---|
author | Tzavella, Loukia Lawrence, Natalia S. Button, Katherine S. Hart, Elizabeth A. Holmes, Natalie M. Houghton, Kimberley Badkar, Nina Macey, Ellie Braggins, Amy-Jayne Murray, Felicity C. Chambers, Christopher D. Adams, Rachel C. |
author_facet | Tzavella, Loukia Lawrence, Natalia S. Button, Katherine S. Hart, Elizabeth A. Holmes, Natalie M. Houghton, Kimberley Badkar, Nina Macey, Ellie Braggins, Amy-Jayne Murray, Felicity C. Chambers, Christopher D. Adams, Rachel C. |
author_sort | Tzavella, Loukia |
collection | PubMed |
description | Inhibitory control training effects on behaviour (e.g. ‘healthier’ food choices) can be driven by changes in affective evaluations of trained stimuli, and theoretical models indicate that changes in action tendencies may be a complementary mechanism. In this preregistered study, we investigated the effects of food-specific go/no-go training on action tendencies, liking and impulsive choices in healthy participants. In the training task, energy-dense foods were assigned to one of three conditions: 100% inhibition (no-go), 0% inhibition (go) or 50% inhibition (control). Automatic action tendencies and liking were measured pre- and post-training for each condition. We found that training did not lead to changes in approach bias towards trained foods (go and no-go relative to control), but we warrant caution in interpreting this finding as there are important limitations to consider for the employed approach–avoidance task. There was only anecdotal evidence for an effect on food liking, but there was evidence for contingency learning during training, and participants were on average less likely to choose a no-go food compared to a control food after training. We discuss these findings from both a methodological and theoretical standpoint and propose that the mechanisms of action behind training effects be investigated further. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8385366 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | The Royal Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83853662021-08-26 Effects of go/no-go training on food-related action tendencies, liking and choice Tzavella, Loukia Lawrence, Natalia S. Button, Katherine S. Hart, Elizabeth A. Holmes, Natalie M. Houghton, Kimberley Badkar, Nina Macey, Ellie Braggins, Amy-Jayne Murray, Felicity C. Chambers, Christopher D. Adams, Rachel C. R Soc Open Sci Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience Inhibitory control training effects on behaviour (e.g. ‘healthier’ food choices) can be driven by changes in affective evaluations of trained stimuli, and theoretical models indicate that changes in action tendencies may be a complementary mechanism. In this preregistered study, we investigated the effects of food-specific go/no-go training on action tendencies, liking and impulsive choices in healthy participants. In the training task, energy-dense foods were assigned to one of three conditions: 100% inhibition (no-go), 0% inhibition (go) or 50% inhibition (control). Automatic action tendencies and liking were measured pre- and post-training for each condition. We found that training did not lead to changes in approach bias towards trained foods (go and no-go relative to control), but we warrant caution in interpreting this finding as there are important limitations to consider for the employed approach–avoidance task. There was only anecdotal evidence for an effect on food liking, but there was evidence for contingency learning during training, and participants were on average less likely to choose a no-go food compared to a control food after training. We discuss these findings from both a methodological and theoretical standpoint and propose that the mechanisms of action behind training effects be investigated further. The Royal Society 2021-08-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8385366/ /pubmed/34457346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.210666 Text en © 2021 The Authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience Tzavella, Loukia Lawrence, Natalia S. Button, Katherine S. Hart, Elizabeth A. Holmes, Natalie M. Houghton, Kimberley Badkar, Nina Macey, Ellie Braggins, Amy-Jayne Murray, Felicity C. Chambers, Christopher D. Adams, Rachel C. Effects of go/no-go training on food-related action tendencies, liking and choice |
title | Effects of go/no-go training on food-related action tendencies, liking and choice |
title_full | Effects of go/no-go training on food-related action tendencies, liking and choice |
title_fullStr | Effects of go/no-go training on food-related action tendencies, liking and choice |
title_full_unstemmed | Effects of go/no-go training on food-related action tendencies, liking and choice |
title_short | Effects of go/no-go training on food-related action tendencies, liking and choice |
title_sort | effects of go/no-go training on food-related action tendencies, liking and choice |
topic | Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8385366/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34457346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.210666 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tzavellaloukia effectsofgonogotrainingonfoodrelatedactiontendencieslikingandchoice AT lawrencenatalias effectsofgonogotrainingonfoodrelatedactiontendencieslikingandchoice AT buttonkatherines effectsofgonogotrainingonfoodrelatedactiontendencieslikingandchoice AT hartelizabetha effectsofgonogotrainingonfoodrelatedactiontendencieslikingandchoice AT holmesnataliem effectsofgonogotrainingonfoodrelatedactiontendencieslikingandchoice AT houghtonkimberley effectsofgonogotrainingonfoodrelatedactiontendencieslikingandchoice AT badkarnina effectsofgonogotrainingonfoodrelatedactiontendencieslikingandchoice AT maceyellie effectsofgonogotrainingonfoodrelatedactiontendencieslikingandchoice AT bragginsamyjayne effectsofgonogotrainingonfoodrelatedactiontendencieslikingandchoice AT murrayfelicityc effectsofgonogotrainingonfoodrelatedactiontendencieslikingandchoice AT chamberschristopherd effectsofgonogotrainingonfoodrelatedactiontendencieslikingandchoice AT adamsrachelc effectsofgonogotrainingonfoodrelatedactiontendencieslikingandchoice |