The capacity of response training to help resist the consumption of sugary drinksuse asterix (*) to get italics

Hugo Najberg, Malika Tapparel, Lucas SpiererPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"

2024

<p style="text-align: justify;">Food response training has been shown to reduce the reported value of palatable food items. These approaches may thus help to reduce unhealthy (over)consumption behaviors and its related diseases. Yet, whether and how training-induced devaluation effects translate into reductions in the target items (over)consumption remains unclear. We addressed this issue by testing whether a combined food Go/NoGo and cue-approach training targeting healthy participants’ favorite sugary drinks can improve how many days they resist drinking them with a double-blind randomized controlled trial. We found that the 100% mapping of motor inhibition with the target unhealthy sugary drink cues in the experimental group did not increase the number of successful days of diet compared to the 50% mapping in the control group (30.7 vs 29.8 days). One possible interpretation of this result is that the training induced an equivalent effect in both groups, a hypothesis supported by the finding for equivalent target item devaluation in both groups. Another possible interpretation is that the training only induced an effect on the few participants prone to fail the diet early, while we recruited mostly resourceful healthy population, as supported by a difference in dieting adherence found only in participants with early failures (18% failure in the experimental group vs. 28.2% in the control group at first quartile). The other planned contrasts did not confirm a correlation between the devaluation effect induced by the training and the number of successful days of diet (r = -0.05), and identified a weak correlation between the number of days of training and the number of successful days of diet (r = 0.22). We propose to conduct another study that includes a control training focused on non-food, i.e. without any mapping with food cue.</p>

food response training, food Go/NoGo, diet, cognitive intervention, consumption behavior

NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).

Medical Sciences, Social sciences

Matthias Aulbach suggested: Sercan Kahveci sercan.kahveci@plus.ac.at , Matthias Aulbach suggested: Hannah van Alebeek hannah.vanalebeek@plus.ac.at, Matthias Aulbach suggested: Sercan Kahveci: sercan.kahveci@plus.ac.at , Matthias Aulbach suggested: Lucy Porter: lucy.porter@ucl.ac.uk , Matthias Aulbach suggested: Natalia Lawrence: Natalia.Lawrence@exeter.ac.uk

e.g. John Doe john@doe.com

No need for them to be recommenders of PCI Registered Reports. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct

2024-06-26 11:41:16

Zhang Chen