These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Double up! Examining the effects of adding inhibition training to food cue exposure in chocolate-loving female students.
    Author: Bongers P, Houben K, Jansen A.
    Journal: Appetite; 2018 Feb 01; 121():154-162. PubMed ID: 29154884.
    Abstract:
    In the present we study investigated whether addition of a Go/No Go training enhanced the effects of food cue exposure. We assessed desire to eat, salivation, CS-US expectancies, and eating in the absence of hunger (EAH) during and after cue exposure. Participants (N = 71) were chocolate-loving female students who tried to eat less chocolate in daily life. They received two sessions of either cue exposure with Go/No Go training (EXP + GNG), cue exposure with a sham training (EXP + shamGNG), or a control procedure with sham training (CON + shamGNG). Results showed that the exposure groups had higher desire to eat and higher levels of salivation during exposure compared to the control group during the control intervention, and that within session and between session habituation occurred in all conditions. In contrast to our hypotheses, lower levels of desire and salivation in the EXP + GNG compared to the EXP + shamGNG group at the end of exposure were not found. In addition, there was an overall decrease in CS-US expectancies with no group differences, and these beliefs were unrelated to EAH. Furthermore, groups did not differ on intake of either the exposed chocolate, non-exposed chocolate or other snack food items. It is concluded that a short Go/No Go training does not have an effect on two sessions of cue exposure treatment.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]