Touchscreen-based assessment of food approach biases: Investigating reliability and item-specific preferences

The only constant is change: Stable vs. variable aspects of food approach bias relate differently to food craving and intake

The tendency to approach food faster than to avoid it (i.e., approach bias) is thought to facilitate food intake, particularly foods that conflict with one's dietary goals. However, this relationship has been difficult to demonstrate, which ties into an ongoing debate about whether such cognitive-behavioral biases represent stable traits or fluctuating states. We thus investigated the temporal fluctuations of food approach bias (1), its within-participant association with food craving (2) and intake (3), and the role of top-down control in this bias-intake association (4). The 76 participants completed an impulsivity questionnaire and performed a smartphone-based approach-avoidance task on nine days. Every day, they also reported their daily craving, intake, and dietary intentions for 12 personalized foods they wanted to eat less or more often over the study period. Approach bias varied considerably within individuals (1), and correlated in unexpected ways with food craving (2) and intake (3); this association of approach bias with intake was moderated by inter-individual differences (rather than day-to-day fluctuations) in dietary intentions and impulsivity (4). Results emphasize the need to re-conceptualize approach bias as comprising both state and trait components, and indicate that the more trait-like aspects of top-down control gate the relationship of approach bias with intake. The large day-to-day variation in approach bias may explain why single-session bias measures often do not predict distal outcomes like body weight. Furthermore, our results suggest that interventions targeting approach bias may be most effective for certain timepoints (high-risk situations) and individuals (those with weak dietary intentions).

How pre-processing decisions affect the reliability and validity of the approach-avoidance task: Evidence from simulations and multiverse analyses with six datasets

Reaction time (RT) data are often pre-processed before analysis by rejecting outliers and errors and aggregating the data. In stimulus-response compatibility paradigms such as the approach-avoidance task (AAT), researchers often decide how to pre-process the data without an empirical basis, leading to the use of methods that may harm data quality. To provide this empirical basis, we investigated how different pre-processing methods affect the reliability and validity of the AAT. Our literature review revealed 108 unique pre-processing pipelines among 163 examined studies. Using empirical datasets, we found that validity and reliability were negatively affected by retaining error trials, by replacing error RTs with the mean RT plus a penalty, and by retaining outliers. In the relevant-feature AAT, bias scores were more reliable and valid if computed with D-scores; medians were less reliable and more unpredictable, while means were also less valid. Simulations revealed bias scores were likely to be less accurate if computed by contrasting a single aggregate of all compatible conditions with that of all incompatible conditions, rather than by contrasting separate averages per condition. We also found that multilevel model random effects were less reliable, valid, and stable, arguing against their use as bias scores. We call upon the field to drop these suboptimal practices to improve the psychometric properties of the AAT. We also call for similar investigations in related RT-based bias measures such as the implicit association task, as their commonly accepted pre-processing practices involve many of the aforementioned discouraged methods. HIGHLIGHTS: • Rejecting RTs deviating more than 2 or 3 SD from the mean gives more reliable and valid results than other outlier rejection methods in empirical data • Removing error trials gives more reliable and valid results than retaining them or replacing them with the block mean and an added penalty • Double-difference scores are more reliable than compatibility scores under most circumstances • More reliable and valid results are obtained both in simulated and real data by using double-difference D-scores, which are obtained by dividing a participant's double mean difference score by the SD of their RTs.

Easy to get, difficult to avoid: Behavioral tendencies toward high-calorie and low-calorie food during a mobile approach-avoidance task interact with body mass index and hunger in a community sample

In recent years, different studies highlighted the importance of assessing behavioral tendencies toward different food stimuli in healthy and pathological samples. However, heterogeneities in experimental approaches and small sample sizes make this literature rather inconsistent. In this study, we used a mobile approach-avoidance task to investigate the behavioral tendencies toward healthy and unhealthy foods compared to neutral objects in a large community sample. The role of some contextual and stable subjective variables was also explored. The sample included 204 participants. The stimuli comprised 15 pictures of unhealthy foods, 15 pictures of healthy foods, and 15 pictures of neutral objects. Participants were required to approach or avoid stimuli by respectively pull or push the smartphone toward or away from themselves. Accuracy and reaction time of each movement were calculated. The analyses were conducted using a generalized linear mixed-effect model (GLMMs), testing the two-way interaction between the type of movement and the stimulus category and the three-way interactions between type of movement, stimulus, and specific variables (BMI, time passed since the last meal, level of perceived hunger). Our results evidenced faster approaching movement toward food stimuli but not toward neutrals. An effect of BMI was also documented: as the BMI increased, participants became slower in avoiding unhealthy compared to healthy foods, and in approaching healthy compared to unhealthy stimuli. Moreover, as hunger increased, participants became faster in approaching and slower in avoiding healthy compared to unhealthy stimuli. In conclusion, our results show an approach tendency toward food stimuli, independent from caloric content, in the general population. Furthermore, approach tendencies to healthy foods decreased with increasing BMI and increased with perceived hunger, indicating the possible influence of different mechanisms on eating-related behavioral tendencies.

Test-retest reliability of a smartphone-based approach-avoidance task: Effects of retest period, stimulus type, and demographics

The approach-avoidance task (AAT) is an implicit task that measures people's behavioral tendencies to approach or avoid stimuli in the environment. In recent years, it has been used successfully to help explain a variety of health problems (e.g., addictions and phobias). Unfortunately, more recent AAT studies have failed to replicate earlier promising findings. One explanation for these replication failures could be that the AAT does not reliably measure approach-avoidance tendencies. Here, we first review existing literature on the reliability of various versions of the AAT. Next, we examine the AAT's reliability in a large and diverse sample (N = 1077; 248 of whom completed all sessions). Using a smartphone-based, mobile AAT, we measured participants' approach-avoidance tendencies eight times over a period of seven months (one measurement per month) in two distinct stimulus sets (happy/sad expressions and disgusting/neutral stimuli). The mobile AAT's split-half reliability was adequate for face stimuli (r = .85), but low for disgust stimuli (r = .72). Its test-retest reliability based on a single measurement was poor for either stimulus set (all ICC1s < .3). Its test-retest reliability based on the average of all eight measurements was moderately good for face stimuli (ICCk = .73), but low for disgust stimuli (ICCk = .5). Results suggest that single-measurement AATs could be influenced by unexplained temporal fluctuations of approach-avoidance tendencies. These fluctuations could be examined in future studies. Until then, this work suggests that future research using the AAT should rely on multiple rather than single measurements.

Conflict in a word-based approach-avoidance task is stronger with positive words

BACKGROUND

Valence and motivational direction are linked. We approach good things and avoid bad things, and experience overriding these links as conflicting. Positive valence is more consistently linked with approach than negative valence is linked with avoidance. Therefore, avoiding positive stimuli should produce greater behavioral and neural signs of conflict than approaching negative stimuli.

METHODS

In the present event-related potential study, we tested this assumption by contrasting positive and negative conflict. We used the manikin task, in which we read positive and negative words that they needed to approach and avoid.

RESULTS

Consistent with our prediction, positive conflict prolonged reaction times more than negative conflict did. A late (500-1000 ms following word onset) event-related potential that we identified as the Conflict slow potential, was only sensitive to positive conflict.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study support the notion that avoiding positive stimuli is more conflicting than approaching negative stimuli. The fact that the conflict slow potential is typically sensitive to response conflict rather than stimulus conflict suggests that the manikin task primarily requires people to override prepotent responses rather than to identify conflicting stimuli. Thus, the present findings also shed light on the psychological processes subserving conflict resolution in the manikin task.

Testing the effectiveness of a mobile approach avoidance intervention and measuring approach biases in an ecological momentary assessment context: study protocol for a randomised-controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Unhealthy eating behaviour is a major contributor to obesity and related diseases and is associated with a behavioural bias to approach rather than avoid desired foods, as measured with reaction time tasks. Approach-avoidance interventions (AAIs) have been proposed as a way to modify food evaluations and help people to eat in accordance with their dietary goals. Mobile implementations of AAI might be easily accessible, low threshold interventions, but their effectiveness has not been established yet.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Participants who aim to change their eating behaviour are randomised to intervention or control groups. They complete six sessions of a smartphone-based AAI, in which they push (ie, avoid) or pull (ie, approach) personalised food images. Intervention group participants always avoid foods that they personally want to eat less often and approach foods that they personally want to eat more often. In the control group, images are paired equally often with both response directions. To evaluate contextual and dynamic intervention effects, ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is measured throughout, with questions about food intake, hunger, stress, emotions, eating intentions, food craving and impulsivity twice a day. Additional EMA preintervention and postintervention measures are administered before and after the intervention phase (4 days each) with a 1-day follow-up EMA 4 weeks after the intervention. Multilevel models will examine the temporal covariance between approach bias and self-reported variables as well as short-term and long-term intervention effects on approach bias, food intake and craving.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Salzburg. Results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at scientific conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

German Clinical Trials Register DRKS, registration number DRKS00030780.

Touchscreen-based approach-avoidance responses to appetitive and threatening stimuli

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Individuals are thought to be biased towards approaching positive stimuli and avoiding negative stimuli. Yet, it is unclear whether this general pattern applies to all stimulus classes or whether biases are more specific. We expected significant approach biases towards two types of positive stimuli, appetitive foods and butterflies; and avoidance biases away from two types of negative stimuli, spoiled foods and spiders.

METHODS

A touchscreen-based Approach-Avoidance Task (AAT), using hand gestures toward or away from stimuli assessed biases. Questionnaires and image ratings assessed individual differences in stimulus evaluations.

RESULTS

Approach biases for butterflies and appetitive foods were found, the latter being strongest towards individually liked foods. There was no avoidance bias for spoiled foods. An avoidance bias for spiders was found in individuals with elevated spider fear.

LIMITATIONS

Incomplete counterbalancing precluded direct comparison between both positive and negative stimuli.

CONCLUSIONS

Behavioural biases in the touchscreen AAT generally co-vary with individuals' affective evaluation of the stimuli. Approach biases were elicited by positive stimuli independently of whether they were regularly (foods) or rarely (butterflies) approached in everyday life. This may hint towards a tendency to approach positive stimuli regardless of the specific category, whereas avoidance biases may be more stimulus specific.

Tasting inhibition: A proof-of-concept study of the food stop-signal game

Self-Control is an important skill in everyday life when attention is automatically drawn toward certain stimuli. For instance, food stimuli automatically capture visual attention and are processed preferentially. Therefore, efficient response inhibition is crucial to refrain from careless overeating. In the present proof-of-concept study we use a novel adaptation of a previously evaluated Stop-Signal Game (SSG) to measure reactive, food-specific, response inhibition in healthy adults. We analyzed a sample of 83 participants (60 female, mean age=24.1, mean BMI=21.71kg/m2) split into three groups. In a gamified stop-signal task, participants navigated an avatar in an urban environment toward high-calorie food, low-calorie food, or non-food stimuli in go-trials and were asked to inhibit the approach reaction in stop-trials. Hunger, eating styles, food craving, and impulsivity were assessed via self-reports to investigate their relationship with (food-specific) response inhibition. Results showed that response inhibition (in terms of stop-signal reaction time, SSRT) did not differ between the high-calorie, low-calorie, and non-food SSG which might be explained by characteristics of the sample. However, impulsivity was positively correlated with SSRT in the low-calorie SSG, whereas food-craving and hunger were positively related to response inhibition in the high-calorie SSG. Future studies could build upon the food SSG to measure and train food-specific response inhibition in the treatment of overeating.

Differential Orbitofrontal Cortex Responses to Chocolate Images While Performing an Approach-Avoidance Task in the MRI Environment

Background: Chocolate is one of the most frequently craved foods, and it often challenges self-regulation. These cravings may be underpinned by a neural facilitation of approach behavior toward chocolate. This preregistered study investigated the behavioral and neural correlates of such a bias using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and reaction times (RTs). Methods: A total of n = 30 frequent chocolate eaters performed a relevant-feature approach-avoidance task (AAT) in the MRI scanner using buttons to enlarge (approach) or to shrink (avoid) pictures of chocolate and inedible control objects. We tested (a) whether implicit RT-based approach biases could be measured in a supine position in the scanner, (b) whether those biases were associated with activity in reward-related brain regions such as the insula, amygdala, striatum, and orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), and (c) whether individual RT-based bias-scores correlated with measures of chocolate craving. Results: Behaviorally, we found a highly reliable approach bias toward chocolate, defined by faster RTs in the compatible conditions (approach chocolate, avoid objects) compared to the incompatible conditions (avoid chocolate, approach objects). Neurally, this compatibility effect involved activity in the left medial OFC, a neural response that was positively correlated with individual approach bias scores. Conclusions: This study shows that the relevant feature AAT can be implemented in an fMRI setting in a supine position using buttons. An approach bias toward chocolate seems related to medial OFC activation that might serve to devalue chocolate when it has to be avoided. Our demonstration of neural and behavioral approach biases for chocolate underscores the need for stimulus-specific cognitive trainings to support healthy consumption and successful self-regulation.

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.

Healthiness matters: Approach motivation for healthy food in overweight and obese individuals

It is well documented that approach tendencies for appetitive substances play a role in certain unhealthy patterns of consumption. However, it remains uncertain whether overweight individuals differ from healthy-weight individuals in terms of their tendency to approach unhealthy foods. Thus, the present study aimed to empirically test the hypothesis that overweight individuals are characterised by an elevated behavioural tendency to approach unhealthy food, rather than healthy food, as compared to healthy-weight individuals. Participants were forty-one overweight individuals (Mean BMI = 30.40 kg/m²) and forty-five healthy-weight individuals (Mean BMI = 22.17 kg/m²) aged between 17 and 47. They completed an Approach-Avoidance Task to assess behavioural approach-avoidance tendencies towards healthy and unhealthy food. Contrary to the hypothesis under test, results revealed a greater approach tendency towards healthy food in overweight individuals, as compared to healthy-weight individuals, whereas there were no group differences in behavioural approach-avoidance tendencies towards unhealthy food. These novel findings suggest that overweight individuals are characterised by an approach motivation for healthy food. We provide suggestions concerning how future researchers can build on these findings to test whether this approach tendency contributes to consumption behaviour in overweight individuals.

Improving the touchscreen-based food approach-avoidance task: remediated block-order effects and initial findings regarding validity

Approach biases to foods may explain why food consumption often diverges from deliberate dietary intentions. Yet, the assessment of behavioural biases with the approach-avoidance tasks (AAT) is often unreliable and validity is partially unclear. The present study continues a series of studies that develop a task based on naturalistic approach and avoidance movements on a touchscreen (hand-AAT). In the hand-AAT, participants are instructed to respond based on the food/non-food distinction, thereby ensuring attention to the stimuli. Yet, this implies the use of instruction switches (i.e., 'approach food - avoid objects' to 'avoid food - approach objects'), which introduce order effects. The present study increased the number of instruction switches to potentially minimize order effects, and re-examined reliability. We additionally included the implicit association task (IAT) and several self-reported eating behaviours to investigate the task's validity. Results replicated the presence of reliable approach biases to foods irrespective of instruction order. Evidence for validity, however, was mixed: biases correlated positively with external eating, increase in food craving and aggregated image valence ratings but not with desire to eat ratings of the individual images considered within participants or the IAT. We conclude that the hand-AAT can reliably assess approach biases to foods that are relevant to self-reported eating patterns.