The DOI matches its Crossref record; 76 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Inhibitory control training for appetitive behaviour change: A meta-analytic investigation of mechanisms of action and moderators of effectiveness
Open accessAbstract
Inhibitory control training (ICT) is a novel intervention in which participants learn to associate appetitive cues with inhibition of behaviour. We present a meta-analytic investigation of laboratory studies of ICT for appetitive behaviour change in which we investigate candidate mechanisms of action, individual differences that may moderate its effectiveness, and compare it to other psychological interventions. We conducted random-effects generic inverse variance meta-analysis on data from 14 articles (18 effect sizes in total). Participants who received ICT chose or consumed significantly less food or alcohol compared to control groups (SMD = 0.36, 95% CIs [0.24, 0.47]; Z = 6.18, p < .001; I(2) = 71%). Effect sizes were larger for motor (Go/No-Go and Stop Signal) compared to oculomotor (Antisaccade) ICT. The effects of ICT on behaviour were comparable to those produced by other psychological interventions, and effects of ICT on food intake were greater in participants who were attempting to restrict their food intake. The magnitude of the effect of ICT on behaviour was predicted by the proportion of successful inhibitions but was unrelated to the absolute number of trials in which appetitive cues were paired with the requirement to inhibit, or the contingency between appetitive cues and the requirement to inhibit. The effect of ICT on cue devaluation (primarily assessed with implicit association tests) was not statistically significant. Our analysis confirms the efficacy of ICT for short-term behaviour change in the laboratory, and we have demonstrated that its effectiveness may depend on pairings between appetitive cues and successful inhibition. We highlight the need for further research to translate these findings outside of the laboratory.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series
(2008) · doi:10.1002/9780470712184 · Cited by 25,048
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.1999.0734 · Cited by 15,798
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x · Cited by 14,099
Diamond, A. (2013) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750 · Cited by 13,268
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
Tarsilla, M. (2010) · Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation · doi:10.56645/jmde.v6i14.284 · Cited by 5,178
Implementation intentions and goal achievement: a meta-analysis of effects and processes
Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(06)38002-1 · Cited by 3,236 · cited 1×
“…effects of ICT on behaviour were comparable to those produced by other, more well-established psychological interventions including implementation intentions (Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006), avoidance training (Wiers et al., 2011) and a brief intervention for problem drinking (Kypri et al., 2009).”
ResultInterpretation of random effects meta-analyses
Riley, R. D., Higgins, J. P. T., & Deeks, J. J. (2011) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.d549 · Cited by 2,884
Meta-analyses involving cross-over trials: methodological issues
Elbourne, D. R., Altman, D. G., Higgins, J. P., Curtin, F., Worthington, H. V., & Vail, A. (2002) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/31.1.140 · Cited by 2,305
On the ability to inhibit simple and choice reaction time responses: A model and a method.
Logan, G. D., Cowan, W. B., & Davis, K. A. (1984) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.10.2.276 · Cited by 1,542
Cited by
Smith, K. E., Mason, T. B., Johnson, J. S., Lavender, J. M., & Wonderlich, S. A. (2018) · International Journal of Eating Disorders · doi:10.1002/eat.22929 · Cited by 170
Changing Behavior Using the Model of Action Phases
Keller, L., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2020) · The Handbook of Behavior Change · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.006 · Cited by 147
Boffo, M., Zerhouni, O., Gronau, Q. F., van Beek, R. J. J., Nikolaou, K., Marsman, M., & Wiers, R. W. (2019) · Neuropsychology Review · doi:10.1007/s11065-018-9386-4 · Cited by 146
Wiers, R. W., Boffo, M., & Field, M. (2018) · Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs · doi:10.15288/jsad.2018.79.333 · Cited by 115
Self-citationKeeler, J. L., Chami, R., Cardi, V., Hodsoll, J., Bonin, E., MacDonald, P., Treasure, J., & Lawrence, N. (2022) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2021.105788 · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Jones, A., Di Lemma, L. C. G., Robinson, E., Christiansen, P., Nolan, S., Tudur-Smith, C., & Field, M.
- Venue
- Appetite
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-02
- Volume
- 97
- Pages
- 16-28
- ISSN
- 0195-6663 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2179388130
- Cited by
- 334
- References
- 76
- FWCI
- 35.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Inhibitory control training for appetitive behaviour change: A meta-analytic investigation of mechanisms of action and moderators of effectiveness. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.appet.2015.11.013
- The paper
- Jones, A., Di Lemma, L. C. G., Robinson, E., Christiansen, P., Nolan, S., Tudur-Smith, C., & Field, M. (2016). Inhibitory control training for appetitive behaviour change: A meta-analytic investigation of mechanisms of action and moderators of effectiveness. Appetite. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.11.013
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.