The effect of stealth vs. declared reductions to lunch meal portion size on subsequent energy intake: A randomised control experiment.

IF 4.9 1区农林科学 Q1 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

Food Quality and Preference Pub Date : 2025-01-22 DOI:10.1016/j.foodqual.2025.105443

Thomas Gough , Jane Brealey , Amy Finlay , Andrew Jones , Eric Robinson

{"title":"The effect of stealth vs. declared reductions to lunch meal portion size on subsequent energy intake: A randomised control experiment.","authors":"Thomas Gough , Jane Brealey , Amy Finlay , Andrew Jones , Eric Robinson","doi":"10.1016/j.foodqual.2025.105443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Large reductions to meal portion size result in reduced daily energy intake due to reductions not being fully compensated for through later energy intake. However, to date no studies have investigated how relatively small portion size reductions (15 %) affect daily energy intake. The present study investigated whether reducing the portion size of a meal by 15 % affects subsequent intake and if this effect differs depending on awareness of the portion size reduction. Participants (<em>N</em> = 110) attended two test days where they were given ad libitum access to a lunch meal and a dinner meal. Portion size of the lunch main course on the second test day was either the same as the amount they had consumed on the test first day (control condition), or 15 % less. Participants served 15 % less were either told that the portion size was the amount they consumed on the previous test day (reduced unaware condition) or it had been reduced (reduced aware condition). Findings revealed that lunch main course intake on the second day was lower in both of the reduced portion size conditions than the control condition. Both immediate and later subsequent intake post-lunch main course did not differ between groups, indicating a lack of evidence for compensatory eating in response to reduced portion size. However, exploratory analyses suggested that participants in the reduced aware condition showed some degree of compensatory eating. These findings suggest that reducing meal portion size by 15 % decreases meal intake and may not cause significant later compensatory eating.</div><div><strong>Trial registration:</strong> This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT06119295</div></div>","PeriodicalId":322,"journal":{"name":"Food Quality and Preference","volume":"127 ","pages":"Article 105443"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Quality and Preference","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950329325000187","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Large reductions to meal portion size result in reduced daily energy intake due to reductions not being fully compensated for through later energy intake. However, to date no studies have investigated how relatively small portion size reductions (15 %) affect daily energy intake. The present study investigated whether reducing the portion size of a meal by 15 % affects subsequent intake and if this effect differs depending on awareness of the portion size reduction. Participants (N = 110) attended two test days where they were given ad libitum access to a lunch meal and a dinner meal. Portion size of the lunch main course on the second test day was either the same as the amount they had consumed on the test first day (control condition), or 15 % less. Participants served 15 % less were either told that the portion size was the amount they consumed on the previous test day (reduced unaware condition) or it had been reduced (reduced aware condition). Findings revealed that lunch main course intake on the second day was lower in both of the reduced portion size conditions than the control condition. Both immediate and later subsequent intake post-lunch main course did not differ between groups, indicating a lack of evidence for compensatory eating in response to reduced portion size. However, exploratory analyses suggested that participants in the reduced aware condition showed some degree of compensatory eating. These findings suggest that reducing meal portion size by 15 % decreases meal intake and may not cause significant later compensatory eating.

Trial registration: This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT06119295

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Food Quality and Preference 工程技术-食品科技

CiteScore

10.40

自引率

15.10%

发文量

263

审稿时长

38 days

期刊介绍： Food Quality and Preference is a journal devoted to sensory, consumer and behavioural research in food and non-food products. It publishes original research, critical reviews, and short communications in sensory and consumer science, and sensometrics. In addition, the journal publishes special invited issues on important timely topics and from relevant conferences. These are aimed at bridging the gap between research and application, bringing together authors and readers in consumer and market research, sensory science, sensometrics and sensory evaluation, nutrition and food choice, as well as food research, product development and sensory quality assurance. Submissions to Food Quality and Preference are limited to papers that include some form of human measurement; papers that are limited to physical/chemical measures or the routine application of sensory, consumer or econometric analysis will not be considered unless they specifically make a novel scientific contribution in line with the journal''s coverage as outlined below.