Fearing the wurst: Robust approach bias towards non-vegetarian food images in a sample of young female vegetarian eaters

Diet and odor hedonic ratings: comparative study between vegetarians, flexitarians, and omnivores

OBJECTIVES

Odor hedonic perception is well known to exhibit great variability and to depend on several parameters, i.e. stimulus, context, and subject characteristics. As hedonic perception (pleasant/unpleasant character) of food odors is considered one of the most prominent dimensions in eating behavior, the question of hedonic variability in this context arises. Thus, the aim of the present study was to compare odor hedonic ratings in three populations with regard to diet (i.e. omnivore, vegetarian, and flexitarian diets).

METHODS

Four categories of odors were compared: meat, vegetable, other food, and non-food odors.

RESULTS

The results showed that vegetarian and flexitarian individuals rated meat odors as more unpleasant than omnivores, while no significant difference was found for other categories of odors.

DISCUSSION

The question of whether the diet influences the hedonic perception or/and inversely is discussed, regarding several aspects of food consumption such as eating disorders, food education, … and could further serve to manage eating behaviors.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

This study evidenced that vegetarians and flexitarians specifically rated meat odors as being more unpleasant than those of omnivores. Because of the growing number of vegetarians and flexitarians in the general population, it could be suggested to take into account the odor hedonic perception (especially regarding food odors) in studies related to diets. Besides, the present results could further serve research in several aspects of food consumption such as eating disorders (anorexia, bulimia … etc.) or food education as well as the management of eating behaviors, especially in an elderly population.

EXPRESS: Reliability and Convergence of Approach/Avoidance Bias Assessment Tasks in the Food Consumption Domain

Theories of motivation posit that people will more readily approach positive or appetitive stimuli, and there has been growing interest in the relationship between biases in approach and avoidance behaviours for food cues and food craving and consumption behaviour. Two paradigms commonly employed by research to investigate this relationship are the Approach Avoidance Task (AAT) and the Stimulus Response Compatibility Task (SRCT). However, it is yet to be determined whether the measures yielded by these tasks reflect the same processes operating in the food craving and consumption domain. The present study examined the internal reliability and convergence of AAT and SRCT paradigms in their assessment of biased approach to unhealthy compared to healthy food stimuli, and whether the measures yielded by the AAT and SRCT paradigms demonstrated associations with individual differences in food craving and eating behaviour. One hundred and twenty-one participants completed an SRCT, an AAT using an arm movement response mode, and an AAT using a key-press response mode. The measures yielded comparable and acceptable levels of internal consistency, but convergence between the different task bias scores was modest or absent, and only approach bias as measured with the AAT task using an arm movement response mode was associated with self-report measures of eating behaviour and trait food craving. Thus, tasks did not converge strongly enough to be considered equivalent measures of approach/avoidance biases, and the AAT task using an arm movement response seems uniquely suited to detecting approach biases argued to characterise maladaptive eating behaviour and craving.