Alleged Approach-Avoidance Conflict for Food Stimuli in Binge Eating Disorder.
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 27045169.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0152271 and PMC identifier 4821640.
- Licence recorded as CC BY.
- The licence permits redistribution, so the abstract is shown in full and the full text is available from the publisher.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Food stimuli are omnipresent and naturally primary reinforcing stimuli. One explanation for the intake of high amounts of food in binge eating disorder (BED) is a deviant valuation process. Valuation of food stimuli is supposed to influence approach or avoidance behaviour towards food. Focusing on self-reported and indirect (facial electromyography) valuation process, motivational aspects in the processing of food stimuli were investigated. METHODS: We compared an overweight sample with BED (BED+) with an overweight sample without BED (BED-) and with normal weight controls (NWC) regarding their self-reported and indirect (via facial electromyography) valuation of food versus non-food stimuli. RESULTS: Regarding the self-reported valuation, the BED+ sample showed a significantly stronger food-bias compared to the BED- sample, as food stimuli were rated as significantly more positive than the non-food stimuli in the BED+ sample. This self-reported valuation pattern could not be displayed in the indirect valuation. Food stimuli evoked negative indirect valuation in all groups. The BED+ sample showed the plainest approach-avoidance conflict marked by a diverging self-reported (positive) and indirect (negative) valuation of food stimuli. CONCLUSIONS: BED+ showed a deviant self-reported valuation of food as compared to BED-. The valuation process of the BED+ sample seems to be characterized by a motivational ambivalence. This ambivalence should be subject of further studies and may be of potential use for therapeutic interventions.
Medical subject headings
- Avoidance Learning
- Binge-Eating Disorder
- Food
- Overweight