social influences on eating behaviour week/lecture 7

Question 1

development of eating habits

Answer 1

• Direct experience of foods and their consequences
  
  • Exposure to patterns of eating within a social/cultural context
  • Knowledge from nutrition education
  • Habitual food selection and consumption
  • Expectations develop

Question 2

dieting and food intake

Answer 2

• Eat more when distracted
  
  • Cognitive load important
    ○ Blass et al., 2006 - TV vs music
  • May interfere with food memory
    ○ Higgs and Woodward, 2009 - subsequent snack intake
  • Food related distractors (variety) can also lead to increased intake
    ○ E.g. Heatherington et al., 2006
    § Study 1: 33 ppts (23 female) attended lab 4 times to eat snack of popcorn (sweet or salted)
    § 4 different conditions
    □ Control
    □ Same taste
    □ Congruent taste
    □ Incongruent taste
    § Study 2: food focus vs food distraction

Question 3

what does distraction do to satiety

Answer 3

delays it

Question 4

social facilitation

Answer 4

• Tendency to eat more in presence of others

Question 5

social facilitation
- De Castro 1997 diary studies

Answer 5

• People eating in groups ate 44% more than those eating alone
  
  • Presence of others has a cumulative effect, but the incremental size of the effect declines as the number of others increases (de Castro and Brewer 1991) - social correlation

Question 6

social impact theory Latane 1981

Answer 6

• Peoples feelings, attitudes and behaviours can be manipulated by the presence of others
  
  • The subsequent impact on behaviour is a result of the interaction between:
    ○ Strength or source of the impact
    ○ Their immediacy/proximity
    ○ Number of sources exerting the impact

Question 7

• The group context

Answer 7

○ Clendenen, Herman and Polivy, 1994 - social facilitation among friends vs strangers
○ Herman 2003 - social correlation effect only present for friends and family not strangers
○ Gender differences - Salvy et al., 2007
○ Eating in crowd vs defined group - relatedness seems to be important (Hirsch and Kramer, 1993)

Question 8

time extension hypothesis

Answer 8

• Increased duration of meals with others - but no modification of eating rate (de Castro; 1990)
  
  • Time extension hypothesis (Pliner et al., 2006)
  • More people = more socialisation = increased meal length (and increased exposure to food cues) –> increased consumption
  • More relaxing environment?

Question 9

social facilitation vs distraction

Answer 9

• 35 ppts (21 men) attended lab 4 times (within subjects)
  ○ Control - ate alone
  ○ Distraction - ate alone with TV on
  ○ Strangers - eat in presence of 2 sex strangers
  ○ Friends - eat in presence of 2 same sex friends
  
  • All sessions recorded and analysed

Question 10

study for social facilitation as a positive

Answer 10

• Walker-Clarke, Walesek & Meyer (2022) systematic review of psychosocial factors influencing the eating behaviours of older adults

Question 11

eating alone in older adults linked to

Answer 11

○ Reduced intake
○ Increased likelihood of low BMI
○ Lower food diversity
○ Decreased consumption of fruit and veg
○ Higher likelihood of skipping meals
○ Reduced food enjoyment

Question 12

impression management

Answer 12

• Attempt to control views of other members of group through socially acceptable behaviour, even if they do not habitually express such behaviour (Leary, 1995)

Question 13

You are what, how and how much you eat

Answer 13

• Vartanian et al. 2007; 2015
  
  • Consumption stereotypes
    ○ Individuals who consume healthier are rate as more feminine, moral and as having a smaller body size and being less fun
    ○ Smaller meals –> femininity, physical attractiveness, leaner, neatness
    ○ Meat, masculinity and morality (Rozin et al., 2012; Ruby and Heine, 2011)

Question 14

studies for impression management

Answer 14

• Lipschitz and Herman (2010)
  ○ Threat to masculine identity –> increased intake of meat
  
  • White and Dahl (2006)
    ○ Males motivated to avoid feminine foods
  • Type and amount of food selected (Young et al., 2009)
  • Role for relative consumption (Leone, Herman and Pliner, 2008)

Question 15

impression management contexts

Answer 15

1. Eating with strangers
   a. Possible explanation for reduced social facilitation with strangers
   
   2. Job interviews
      a. Can/does food intake convey personal characteristics that could be relevant to job performance?
   3. Romantic relationships
      a. First date foods (Amiraian and Sobal, 2009)

Question 16

Ruddock et al 2019

Answer 16

• Systematic review and meta-analysis of 42 studies exploring the social facilitation effect
  
  • Eat more when with friends (29%-48% larger compared to eating alone)
  • Moderating factors may indicate impression management
    ○ Weight status, gender and food types
    ○ E.g. women eating smaller portions in front on men regardless of familiarity
    ○ Overweight people eat smaller portions when eating with others compared to alone

Question 17

modelling and EB

Answer 17

• Perceived eating habits of others are important
  
  • Nisbett and Storms (1974) taste test study
    ○ Food consumption of the confederate influenced consumption of ppt

Question 18

caveats of modelling

Answer 18

○ Presence of the confederate
○ Similarity of the confederate
○ Attractiveness/slimness
○ Hunger
○ Realism

Question 19

modelling and confederates

Answer 19

• Confederate studies replicated many times
  
  • Ppts eat nearly 2x as much in the high intake condition compared to low intake condition
    ○ Feeney et al., 2011, Herman et al., 2010
  • Studies have replicated effects in children
    ○ Belevander et al., 2012
  • Dyad studies
    ○ Herman et al., 2005
    ○ Robinson et al., 2011
  • Impact on food choice
    ○ Robinson and Higgs 2013
  • Evidence:
    ○ Cruwys, Belevander and Hermans 2015: robustness of the modelling effect
    § Increased desire for affiliation/perceived similarities to model
    § Attenuation for healthy snacks or breakfast/lunch
    § Food choice vs food intake
    § Limited evidence for moderating effects of hunger, presence, age, weight, personality, eating goals, etc

Question 20

role of perceived similarity (shared identity) - study

Answer 20

• Cruwys et al., 2012
  ○ N=119 female university students
  ○ Exposed to confederate (4 conditions)
  § In group vs out group
  § All of the popcorn (high norm) vs none of the popcorn (low norm)
  ○ Evaluation of university promotion videos
  ○ Measured how much popcorn was consumed
  ○ No differences in popcorn consumption between low and high norm conditions when confederate is presented as an outgroup member
  ○ Modelling of eating behaviour occurs for both the low and high norm conditions when confederate is presented as an in group member

Question 21

modelling for approariateness

Answer 21

○ Normative theory (Herman and polivy 2005)
○ Principle regulatory influence on eating in social contexts is people’s beliefs about what or how much is appropriate to eat
○ Uncertainty and affiliation

Question 22

modelling for ingratiation (trying to be liked)

Answer 22

○ Behavioural mimicry (automatic process - cognitive load)
○ Remote confederate design

Question 23

evidence for social comparison theory (Festinger 1954)

Answer 23

§ Body image and media exposure
□ Eating after exposure to thin images
□ Overall decrease; restraint predicts increase in consumption
§ Modelling only when similarities exist
§ Presence of other at a meal
□ Salvy et al 2009
§ Pizza slice study
□ Polivy, Herman and Deo 2010

Question 24

what are social norms

Answer 24

• Social norms are implicit codes of conduct that provide a guide to appropriate action
  ○ Perceived standards for appropriate consumption for particular social group
  ○ Communicated via cultural practices and rules, behaviours or via env. cues
  ○ Descriptive (perceived prevalence) vs injunctive (perceived expectations) norms

Question 25

what are social norms important for?

Answer 25

• Norms important for affiliation and to engage in ‘correct’ behaviour
  ○ Higgs 2015 - adaptive behaviour to ensure consumption of safe foods and enhance evolutionary fitness
  ○ Not following social norms might result in social disapproval
  ○ Norm following more likely when uncertainty about what constitutes correct behaviour and where greater shared identity with referent group

Question 26

• Hawkins, farrow and Thomas (2020)
  social norms

Answer 26

○ 369 ppts reported
§ Perceptions of FB users consumption of, and preferences for fruit, veg, energy dense snack and sugar sweetened beverages
§ Their own consumption of these foods
§ BMI
○ Perceived norms for FB users’ consumption were sig. positive predictors of ppts consumption for both fruit and veg, snacks and SSB

Question 27

• Hawkins, Farrow and Thomas (2021)
  social norms

Answer 27

○ Subsequent experimental study
○ Between-groups design - 169 female students viewed 3 types of images (20/group)
§ High energy dense
§ Low energy dense
§ Interior design
○ Only one type of image was socially endorsed via ‘likes’ in each condition.
○ Snack buffet of grapes and cookies

findings:
- sig main effect of condition for grapes consumption- those in LED conditions consumed higher proportion of grapes compared to cookies than HED condition
- no differences between control with LED or HED
- exposure to socially endorsed LEd food images may contribute to healthy eating, by nudging individuals to select and consume larger portions of LED food relative to HED food

Question 28

holistic approach of social influence

Answer 28

situated identity enactment model (Cruwys et al., 2016)

Question 29

situated identity enactment model (Cruwys et al., 2016)

Answer 29

SI in relation to development of disordered eating

norms, social identity and context