Cited by 278Eating Disorders and BehaviorsNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Stress and eating: the effects of ego-threat and cognitive demand on food intake in restrained and emotional eaters

Open access
Wallis, D.J., Hetherington, M.M.·2004·Appetite

Abstract

Restrained and emotional eaters overeat in response to stress. To compare differential effects of cognitive demand and ego-threatening stressors on subsequent chocolate intake, 38 females completed a neutral (control), an ego threatening and an incongruent Stroop colour-naming task on three separate occasions. Participants were assigned to four groups based on median-split scores on the restrained and emotional eating scales of the Dutch Eating Behaviour Questionnaire-high restraint/high emotional, high restraint/low emotional, low restraint/high emotional and low restraint/low emotional. Higher response latencies were observed in the incongruent task, confirming its greater cognitive (attentional) demand. Overall intake was enhanced by 23% after ego-threat and 15% after the incongruent Stroop task relative to control. Restraint was associated with greater intake after both ego-threat and the incongruent task than in the control condition. In contrast, emotional eating was associated with greater intake after only the ego-threat, relative to control. A positive association between reaction time and subsequent intake in all conditions for high restraint/low emotional eaters provided support for the limited capacity hypothesis. Enhanced intake in emotional eaters is proposed to relate to escape from self-awareness. These findings demonstrate differential effects of threat and demand on stress-related eating in restrained and emotional eaters.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.appet.2004.02.001

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wallis, D. J., & Hetherington, M. M.
Affiliations
University of Liverpool (GB)
Corresponding author
Hetherington, M.M.
Venue
Appetite
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-08
Volume
43
Issue
1
Pages
39-46
ISSN
0195-6663 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1996434438
Cited by
278
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 13
FWCI
9.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Appetite (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DMU Open Research Archive (De Montfort University) (submittedVersion)
  • Loughborough University Institutional Repository (Loughborough University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Loughborough University Research Repository (Loughborough University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
stress eating, ego threat, cognitive demand, dietary intake, dietary restraint, emotional eating, Stroop task, self-awareness, reaction time
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Appetite, Eating, Ego, Feeding Behavior, Female, Humans, Internal-External Control, Interpersonal Relations, Netherlands, Surveys and Questionnaires, Stress, Psychological

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