Appetite, Volume 50, Issues 02-03 (March-May 2008)
by: P. Atkins, H.R. Berthoud, N.W. Bond, D. Hoffman, A. Jansen, S. Thornton, Y. Wada and D.A. Zellner (Executive Editors)
en | Elsevier Ltd.
Appetite is an international research journal specializing in behavioural nutrition and the cultural, sensory, and physiological influences on choices and intakes of foods and drinks. It covers normal and disordered eating and drinking, dietary attitudes and practices and all aspects of the bases of human and animal behaviour toward food.
The journal carries short communications, book reviews and abstracts from major meetings in the social science, psychology or neuroscience of food consumption, including the Association for the Study of Food in Society, the Society for the Study of Ingestive Behavior, and conferences on Food Choice.
Research Areas Include:
• Preventive, experimental and clinical nutrition
• Eating disorders
• Sensory evaluation of foods
• Food attitudes and marketing
• Ethnography of food habits
• Psychology of ingestion
• Zoology of foraging
• Neuroscience of feeding and drinking
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table of Contents:
Research Reviews
Food neophobia and ‘picky/fussy’ eating in children: A review. Terence M. Dovey, Paul A. Staples, E. Leigh Gibson, Jason C.G. Halford. Pages 181-193
Abstract
Two factors have been shown to contribute to rejection or acceptance of fruits and vegetables: food neophobia and ‘picky/fussy’ eating. Food neophobia is generally regarded as the reluctance to eat, or the avoidance of, new foods. In contrast, ‘picky/fussy’ eaters are usually defined as children who consume an inadequate variety of foods through rejection of a substantial amount of foods that are familiar (as well as unfamiliar) to them. Through understanding the variables which influence the development or expression of these factors (including age, personality, gender, social influences and willingness to try foods) we can further understand the similarities and differences between the two. Due to the inter-relationship between ‘picky/fussy’ eating and food neophobia, some factors, such as pressure to eat, personality factors, parental practices or feeding styles and social influences, will have similar effects on both magnitude and duration of expression of these behaviours. On the other hand, these constructs may be differentially affected by factors such as age, tactile defensiveness, environment and culture. The effects of these variables are discussed within this review. Behavioural interventions, focusing on early life exposure, could be developed to attenuate food neophobia and ‘picky/fussy’ eating in children, so promoting the ready acceptance and independent choice of fruits and vegetables.
Article Outline
Introduction
Food neophobia
Food neophobia and age
Food neophobia, personality and gender
Food neophobia, social facilitation and social influence
Food neophobia and willingness to try novel foods
Picky/fussy eaters
Measuring ‘picky/fussy’ eaters
Development of the ‘picky/fussy’ eater
The diet of ‘picky/fussy’ eaters
Summary
Conclusion
References
Anticipatory physiological regulation in feeding biology: Cephalic phase responses. Michael L. Power, Jay Schulkin. Pages 194-206
Abstract
Anticipatory physiological regulation is an adaptive strategy that enables animals to respond faster to physiologic and metabolic challenges. The cephalic phase responses are anticipatory responses that prepare animals to digest, absorb, and metabolize nutrients. They enable the sensory aspects of the food to interact with the metabolic state of the animal to influence feeding behavior. The anticipatory digestive secretions and metabolic adjustments in response to food cues are key adaptations that affect digestive and metabolic efficiency and aid in controlling the resulting elevation of metabolic fuels in the blood. Cephalic phase responses enable digestion, metabolism, and appetite to be regulated in a coordinated fashion. These responses have significant effects on meal size. For example, if the cephalic phase insulin response is blocked the result is poor glucose control and smaller meals. Cephalic phase responses also are linked to motivation to feed, and may play a more direct role in regulating meal size beyond the permissive one of ameliorating negative consequences of feeding. For example, the orexigenic peptide ghrelin appears to display a cephalic phase response, rising before expected meal times. This anticipatory ghrelin response increases appetite; interestingly it also enhances fat absorption, linking appetite with digestion and metabolism.
|
|
|