"Yummy" versus "Yucky"! Explicit and implicit approach-avoidance motivations towards appealing and disgusting foods

被引:57
作者
Piqueras-Fiszrnan, Betina [1 ]
Kraus, Alexandra A. [2 ,3 ]
Spence, Charles [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oxford, Dept Expt Psychol, Oxford OX1 3UD, England
[2] Aarhus Univ, Dept Business Adm, DK-8000 Aarhus, Denmark
[3] Aarhus Univ, MAPP, DK-8000 Aarhus, Denmark
关键词
Pleasantness; Wanting; Disgust; Implicit; Approach-avoidance; Motivation; EATING-DISORDERS; ASSOCIATION TEST; HIGH-CALORIE; ARM FLEXION; LIKING; DEPRIVATION; DETERMINANTS; REJECTIONS; SALIVATION; EXTENSION;
D O I
10.1016/j.appet.2014.03.029
中图分类号
B84 [心理学]; C [社会科学总论]; Q98 [人类学];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 030303 ; 04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Wanting and rejecting food are natural reactions that we humans all experience, often unconsciously, on a daily basis. However, in the food domain, the focus to date has primarily been on the approach tendency, and researchers have tended not to study the two opposing tendencies in a balanced manner. Here, we develop a methodology with which to understand people's implicit and explicit reactions to both positive (appealing) and negative (disgusting) foods. It consists of a combination of direct and indirect computer-based tasks, as well as a validated food image stimulus set, specifically designed to investigate motivational approach and avoidance responses towards foods. Fifty non-dieting participants varying in terms of their hunger state (hungry vs. not hungry) reported their explicit evaluations of pleasantness, wanting, and disgust towards the idea of tasting each of the food images that were shown. Their motivational tendencies towards those food items were assessed indirectly using a joystick-based approach-avoidance procedure. For each of the food images that were presented, the participants had to move the joystick either towards or away from themselves (approach and avoidance movements, respectively) according to some unrelated instructions, while their reaction times were recorded. Our findings demonstrated the hypothesised approach avoidance compatibility effect: a significant interaction of food valence and direction of movement. Furthermore, differences between the experimental groups were observed. The participants in the no-hunger group performed avoidance (vs. approach) movements significantly faster; and their approach movements towards positive (vs. negative) foods were significantly faster. As expected, the self-report measures revealed a strong effect of the food category on the three dependent variables and a strong main effect of the hunger state on wanting and to a lesser extent on pleasantness. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:193 / 202
页数:10
相关论文
共 49 条
[1]   THE ROLE OF FRUSTRATIVE NONREWARD IN NONCONTINUOUS REWARD SITUATIONS [J].
AMSEL, A .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 1958, 55 (02) :102-119
[2]   FRUSTRATION THEORY - MANY YEARS LATER [J].
AMSEL, A .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 1992, 112 (03) :396-399
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2005, Technical Report A-6
[4]  
Antonetti DE., 2013, J BEHAV BRAIN SCI, V3, P1, DOI [DOI 10.4236/JBBS.2013.31001, 10.4236/jbbs.2013.31001]
[5]   Food reward: Brain substrates of wanting and liking [J].
Berridge, KC .
NEUROSCIENCE AND BIOBEHAVIORAL REVIEWS, 1996, 20 (01) :1-25
[6]   'Liking' and 'wanting' food rewards: Brain substrates and roles in eating disorders [J].
Berridge, Kent C. .
PHYSIOLOGY & BEHAVIOR, 2009, 97 (05) :537-550
[7]   ELEVATED RESPONSE OF HUMAN AMYGDALA TO NEUTRAL STIMULI IN MILD POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER: NEURAL CORRELATES OF GENERALIZED EMOTIONAL RESPONSE [J].
Brunetti, M. ;
Sepede, G. ;
Mingoia, G. ;
Catani, C. ;
Ferretti, A. ;
Merla, A. ;
Del Gratta, C. ;
Romani, G. L. ;
Babiloni, C. .
NEUROSCIENCE, 2010, 168 (03) :670-679
[8]  
CACIOPPO JT, 1993, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V65, P5
[9]   Bug Mac and flies Are insects really the future of food? [J].
Ceurstemont, Sandrine .
NEW SCIENTIST, 2013, 219 (2924) :34-37
[10]   Consequences of automatic evaluation: Immediate behavioral predispositions to approach or avoid the stimulus [J].
Chen, M ;
Bargh, JA .
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN, 1999, 25 (02) :215-224