Cited by 141Regulation of Appetite and ObesityNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorEating Disorders and Behaviors

Sensory-specific satiety and its importance in meal termination

Hetherington, M.M.·1996·Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

Abstract

Pleasantness is important in influencing food choice, and may play a role in determining the amount of food consumed. Judgements of pleasantness decrease as the food is eaten. It has been proposed that his reflects the development of satiety to a specific food. However, consumers may not rate these changes as important in meal termination. Fifty-seven subjects were given ad lib access to a test meal of cheese on crackers and at the end of this meal recorded the main reason for stopping from a possible seven statements. They then rank ordered the importance of each reason. One hour later, subjects were offered a choice of the same food, a different food, or no second course. Again reasons for stopping were recorded by those who selected a second course. The most common reason given for a meal termination in the first course was "I got tired of eating that food" (40%) and for the second course "I felt full" (48%). Subjects were divided into those who rated fatigue and changes in pleasantness as important and those who rated fullness as more important. Significant differences in intake between these groups indicated that those who rated fatigue/hedonics as important consumed significantly fewer calories (275 +/- 23 kcal) than those who rated fullness as more important (424 +/- 65 kcal). It is argued that fatigue experienced by subjects may reflect sensory fatigue and that this is an important part of the development of sensory-specific satiety. Since subjects who rated gastric fullness as the most important reason for terminating the meal consumed more calories, it is suggested that this index of satiety may be relatively more crude than sensory or hedonic variables.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0149-7634(95)00048-j

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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 citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 16 · Cited by 141

Authors
Hetherington, M. M.
Affiliations
University of Dundee (GB)
Corresponding author
Hetherington, M.M.
Venue
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1996-01
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
113-117
ISSN
0149-7634 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2085514243
Cited by
141
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 11
FWCI
0.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
Keywords
sensory-specific satiety, meal termination, dietary intake, food pleasantness, sensory fatigue, satiety, food choice
MeSH terms
Adult, Appetite, Eating, Energy Metabolism, Female, Humans, Male, Taste

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