1/21
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Human appetite and scarcity
Human appetite is shaped under scarcity
Food access was unpredictable
Energy storage increased survival
Overeating was adaptive
Our appetite system prioritizes intake, not precision.
Sensory specific satiety
Eating reduces the appeal of the food we are eating
To ensure variety intake, from a evolutionary perspective also valuable
Children were more likely to eat a second snack if it was a different second snack.
Boundary model
The idea that you have two extremes, extremely full or extremely hungry.
In between is the mindless eating zone
Conditioned satiety
Through previous experience, we learn what to expect from a food
This influences how much we at, but does not prevent overeating
Children vs. adults: who compensates based on calories?
Children compensated perfectly, if they had a high-energy preload than they ate less lunch.
Adults did not do this: ate just as much lunch as they normally would
This is because maybe:
Satiety develops relatively slow - not much precise information about how much we had
Eating more is not compensated typically
Clean plate: parents may teach children to finish everything on plate → children learn to ignore fullness?

How do we often decide quantity? How does this differ with age?
Adults rely on external cues (portion size, packaging, norms)
Children rely more on internal cues, but with age, external cues dominate.
Three cues in our food environment
Food is everywhere - there are too many calories available.
Also on our phones through marketing and ads.
Cheap, tasty long-lasting products are more profitable
Fresh, healthy products: higher costs
Portion and package size
More served = more consumed
When there are bigger portions in packages you are likely to consume more (e.g. big mars vs small mars)
Marketing and advertising
Digital marketing more powerful through repeated exposure and personalization
You get exposed to things you like.
Certain unhealthy things are not allowed on packaging anymore like k3
Guilt is lower when packages say “fitness” or “light”
The unqeal food environment
Some people are surrounded by more unhealthy food cues than others
More unhealthy exposure in disadvantaged neighborhoods → linked to less healthy diets and higher risks
Algorithmic reinforcement online may create unhealthy filter bubbles
Two ways in which we respond to food cues
Thinking fast = system 1
Thinking slow = system 2
What does our long-term memory look like?
Is an associative network
Seeing or being asked about one node → activates another one in memory
Activation spreads to connected concepts
Modern food environment = constant activation
Why it feels normal to eat more
Repeated activations makes certain ideas feel normal and expected
‘I deserve a treat’, ‘All students eat this’ are automatically activated norms
Eating becomes habitual
How can a single cue shape our whole perception of a product
Protein hype is good example
Just because it has more protein does not mean its healthy

Heuristics
Heuristics in marketing are fast, subconscious mental shortcuts that consumers and marketers use to simplify complex, time-sensitive decisions and reduce cognitive load under uncertainty
direct responses to cues in environment
strong influence on what, when and how much we eat
Examples of heuristics
Large = better value
Scarcity = popular and good
Vegetables in meal = less calories
Healthy = expensive
Dose insensitivity
Example of heuristic
If something is harmful in large quantities, then it is also harmful in small quantities
Fat is often seen as unhealthy, even in small amounts
The presence of chemicals may be interpreted as proof of danger regardless of the amount.
Negative calorie illusion
The idea that if there is a salad next to a burger that the burger becomes healthier
But of course the burger remains the same calories

Can we regulate our responses?
Yes we can plan ahead and think about consequences with pre-frontal cortex
To self regulate we need to recognize a conflict and choose a strategy to change our food choice.
This thinking is also in the form of system one and two:
System 1: fast, automatic responses
system 2: slower, reflective thinking → self-regulation helps us manage automatic responses, but requires attention and effort
Capacity depends on our state (not tired, overwhelmed, emotional) → otherwise ‘automatic’ system 1)
Four strategy families in eating decisions
Cognitive change: changing the way you think about the food (e.g. train your mindset to like the idea of eating healthy)
Response modulation: changing how you react or respond to the craving (e.g. first drink a glass of water)
Situational strategies: changing your environment to avoid the temptation (e.g. putting unhealthy foods in a different location)
Additional deployment: changing where you focus your attention (e.g. at a party don’t stand near buffet but focus attention on people present)
Why do people still fail when using the four strategies?
They pick the weakest strategy (cognitive change)
They have no back-up plan: they use only one strategy
they run out of energy: fighting temptation costs a lot of brain energy
They think in “black & white”: one small mistake feels like total failure, which leads to overeating
They use them as an excuse (self-licensing) (“now i deserve a treat”)
Study: self-licensing
95 female students did writing taks of 15 minutes
They were told the task was high-effort, low effort or received no info
After task; high caloric snacks to enjoy
Self-licensing = using justifications to give yourself permission to give into temptation
When does self-regulation become too rigid?
‘All or nothing’ mentality: one deviation = failure
Little flexibility to adjust strategies
Can produce disinhibition: “I have failed, so it no longer matters”
Most important predictor of gaining weight after losing weight
Accepting imperfection might prevent this cycle
Scarcity mindset and self-regulation
Some groups have more financial stress leading to tunneling (e.g. only foucs on price), high congnitive load (brain energy gone) and present focus