- Maria G. Veldhuizen (1)
- C.P. Herman (1)
- Stephanie Kullmann (1)
- Laura N. Laan van der (1)
- Hubert Preissl (1)
- Dana Small (1)
- W.A. Staveren van (1)
- Eric Stice (1)
- T. Strien van (1)
Good practice in food-related neuroimaging
Smeets, Paul A.M. ; Dagher, Alain ; Hare, Todd A. ; Kullmann, Stephanie ; Laan, Laura N. van der; Poldrack, Russell A. ; Preissl, Hubert ; Small, Dana ; Stice, Eric ; Veldhuizen, Maria G. - \ 2019
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 109 (2019)3. - ISSN 0002-9165 - p. 491 - 503.
aroma - data sharing - food choice - food viewing - functional magnetic resonance imaging - good practice - neuroimaging - satiation - taste
The use of neuroimaging tools, especially functional magnetic resonance imaging, in nutritional research has increased substantially over the past 2 decades. Neuroimaging is a research tool with great potential impact on the field of nutrition, but to achieve that potential, appropriate use of techniques and interpretation of neuroimaging results is necessary. In this article, we present guidelines for good methodological practice in functional magnetic resonance imaging studies and flag specific limitations in the hope of helping researchers to make the most of neuroimaging tools and avoid potential pitfalls. We highlight specific considerations for food-related studies, such as how to adjust statistically for common confounders, like, for example, hunger state, menstrual phase, and BMI, as well as how to optimally match different types of food stimuli. Finally, we summarize current research needs and future directions, such as the use of prospective designs and more realistic paradigms for studying eating behavior.
The validity of dietary restraint scales: Comment on Stice et al. (2004)
Strien, T. van; Engels, R. ; Staveren, W.A. van; Herman, C.P. - \ 2006
Psychological Assessment 18 (2006)1. - ISSN 1040-3590 - p. 89 - 94.
eating behaviors - energy-intake - body-weight - adolescents - women - questionnaire - consumption - stability - tendency - obesity
In 4 empirical studies, E. Stice, M. Fisher, and M. R. Lowe (2004) calculated the correlations between some widely used dietary restraint scales and food intake. Failing to find substantial negative correlations, they concluded that these scales were invalid. The current article challenges this conclusion. For one thing, there is some evidence that restrained eaters do eat less than do unrestrained eaters under controlled experimental conditions favoring self-control. Dietary restraint is also associated with tendencies toward disinhibition under conditions favoring lose. of self-control; such disinhibition often masks (but does not invalidate) the construct of dietary restraint. For these and other reasons, the assessment of food intake at a single eating episode may not capture overall dietary restriction. Finally, how much one eats does not necessarily indicate whether one has eaten less than one desired to eat. The authors suggest that the existing restraint scales do in fact validly assess restriction of food intake, albeit in a more complex fashion than is evident from simple correlations in single episodes.