Cited by 78Regulation of Appetite and ObesityEating Disorders and BehaviorsNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Food cue reactivity: Neurobiological and behavioral underpinnings

Open access
Kanoski, Scott E., Boutelle, Kerri N.·2022·Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders

Abstract

The modern obesogenic environment contains an abundance of food cues (e.g., sight, smell of food) as well cues that are associated with food through learning and memory processes. Food cue exposure can lead to food seeking and excessive consumption in otherwise food-sated individuals, and a high level of food cue responsivity is a risk factor for overweight and obesity. Similar food cue responses are observed in experimental rodent models, and these models are therefore useful for mechanistically identifying the neural circuits mediating food cue responsivity. This review draws from both experimental rodent models and human data to characterize the behavioral and biological processes through which food-associated stimuli contribute to overeating and weight gain. Two rodent models are emphasized – cue-potentiated feeding and Pavlovian-instrumental transfer – that provide insight in the neural circuits and peptide systems underlying food cue responsivity. Data from humans are highlighted that reveal physiological, psychological, and neural mechanisms that connect food cue responsivity with overeating and weight gain. The collective literature identifies connections between heightened food cue responsivity and obesity in both rodents and humans, and identifies underlying brain regions (nucleus accumbens, amygdala, orbitofrontal cortex, hippocampus) and endocrine systems (ghrelin) that regulate food cue responsivity in both species. These species similarities are encouraging for the possibility of mechanistic rodent model research and further human research leading to novel treatments for excessive food cue responsivity in humans.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11154-022-09724-x

Cites

167 of 167 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The CIRO model posits that the presence of food cues elicits varying degrees of food cue reactivity, which is influenced by constant and transient influencers and, when heightened, contributes to overeating and weight gain.

    “In this model, the presence of food cues elicits varying degrees of food cue reactivity, which is influenced by constant and transient influencers and, when heightened, ultimately contributes to overeating and weight gain [40].”
  • Heightened cue reactivity, assessed as self-reported preoccupation with food or brain response to food cues, has been observed in overweight individuals and those with binge-eating disorder.

    “heightened cue reactivity, which is often assessed as self-reported preoccupation with food or measured using changes in brain response to food cues, has been observed in overweight individuals [39] and those living with a binge-eating disorder [40].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [90]Kang Sim D, Manzano M, Strong D, Development of the Food Cue Sensitivity Questionnaire: A unidimensional measure of behavioral and cognitive cue reactivity. Under Review;
  2. [93]van den Akker K. Learned desires: the acquisition and extinction of appetitive responses to food cues in humans Doctoral Thesis. Maastricht University, Maastricht. 2017;

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kanoski, S. E., & Boutelle, K. N.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
Boutelle, Kerri N.
Venue
Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders
Published
2022-04-28
Volume
23
Issue
4
Pages
683-696
ISSN
  • 1389-9155 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2606
OpenAlex
W4225091009
Cited by
78
References
167
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4
FWCI
1.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (DK123423, DK104897, DK122504, DK111106, DK114794, DK118402)
  • U.S. Department of Defense (W81XWH1810220)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
food cue reactivity, obesity, overeating, Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer, rodent models, nucleus accumbens, amygdala, orbitofrontal cortex, hippocampus, ghrelin, neural circuits, obesogenic environment
MeSH terms
Cues, Feeding Behavior, Humans, Hyperphagia, Obesity, Weight Gain

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review