Cited by 6Regulation of Appetite and ObesityEating Disorders and BehaviorsOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies

Virtual grocery shopping and cookie consumption following intranasal insulin or placebo application.

Rodriguez-Raecke, Rea, Sommer, Miriam, Brünner, Yvonne Felicitas, Müschenich, Franziska Sonja, Sijben, Rik·2020·Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology

Abstract

Insulin receptors are present in brain areas that are involved in the control of hunger and satiety, and intranasal insulin is assumed to have an anorexigenic effect. This known influence of insulin on satiety encouraged us to investigate the effect of intranasal insulin on feeding-related behaviors. The aim of the current study was to explore the influence of 40 IU of intranasal insulin on the grocery shopping behavior and cookie consumption in a group of 30 healthy young men, using a crossover randomized double-blind design. Using a virtual mock supermarket, we tested whether the intranasal administration of insulin influences purchase behavior in comparison to a placebo or control condition. The participants also provided hedonic ratings of food pictures, as well as their subjective feeling of hunger. We calculated an objective measure of hunger from the amount of cookies eaten. In contradiction to our hypotheses, no significant differences regarding ratings, calorie content of purchased food products, and cookie consumption were found between the treatment conditions. Our conclusion is that 40 IU intranasal insulin had no influence on the evaluation of pictured foods in healthy young men in our task. Acknowledging that previous studies have found effects for intranasal insulin and food cue processing, we suggest that future research should focus on chemosensory stimulation or cognitive tasks in behavioral experiments and carefully consider the doses of intranasal insulin. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pha0000330

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?

  • Recent experiments combining acute 40 IU IN insulin with a virtual grocery shopping task failed to find a hypophagic insulin effect in healthy young men.

    “However, recent experiments that combined the IN administration of an acute dose of 40 IU of insulin with a virtual grocery shopping task failed to find a hypophagic insulin effect in healthy young men.”

    From Intranasal insulin (2021) · cites this paper as [62]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rodriguez-Raecke, R., Sommer, M., Brünner, Y. F., Müschenich, F. S., & Sijben, R.
Venue
Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
Published
2020-08
Volume
28
Issue
4
Pages
495-500
ISSN
  • 1064-1297 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-2293
OpenAlex
W2981395493
Cited by
6
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2
FWCI
0.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Sensory Systems › Olfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Keywords
intranasal insulin, grocery shopping behavior, food purchase behavior, hunger, satiety, virtual supermarket, anorectic effect, insulin dose
MeSH terms
Administration, Intranasal, Adult, Brain, Energy Intake, Double-Blind Method, Feeding Behavior, Food, Humans, Hunger, Insulin, Male, Cross-Over Studies, Young Adult

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