The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Dietary Self-Control Is Related to the Speed With Which Attributes of Healthfulness and Tastiness Are Processed
Open accessAbstract
We propose that self-control failures, and variation across individuals in self-control abilities, are partly due to differences in the speed with which the decision-making circuitry processes basic attributes, such as tastiness, versus more abstract attributes, such as healthfulness. We tested these hypotheses by combining a dietary-choice task with a novel form of mouse tracking that allowed us to pinpoint when different attributes were being integrated into the choice process with temporal resolution at the millisecond level. We found that, on average, tastiness was processed about 195 ms earlier than healthfulness during the choice process. We also found that 13% to 39% of observed individual differences in self-control ability could be explained by differences in the relative speed with which tastiness and healthfulness were processed.
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
Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting
Laibson, D. (1997) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355397555253 · Cited by 6,122
Self-regulation and depletion of limited resources: Does self-control resemble a muscle?
Muraven, M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.126.2.247 · Cited by 4,510
The Diffusion Decision Model: Theory and Data for Two-Choice Decision Tasks
Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (2008) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.2008.12-06-420 · Cited by 3,059
Out of Control: Visceral Influences on Behavior
Loewenstein, G. (1996) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 · Cited by 2,610
Modeling Response Times for Two-Choice Decisions
Ratcliff, R., & Rouder, J. N. (1998) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00067 · Cited by 1,478
Age differences in future orientation and delay discounting
Steinberg, L., Graham, S., O’Brien, L., Woolard, J., Cauffman, E., & Banich, M. (2009) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01244.x · Cited by 1,237
Measures of impulsivity in cigarette smokers and non-smokers
Mitchell, S. H. (1999) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/pl00005491 · Cited by 911
Individual Differences in Reward Drive Predict Neural Responses to Images of Food
Beaver, J. D., Lawrence, A. D., van Ditzhuijzen, J., Davis, M. H., Woods, A., & Calder, A. J. (2006) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0350-06.2006 · Cited by 594
Hare, T. A., Malmaud, J., & Rangel, A. (2011) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.6383-10.2011 · Cited by 556
Self-citationHutcherson, C. A., Plassmann, H., Gross, J. J., & Rangel, A. (2012) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.6387-11.2012 · Cited by 227
Self-citation
Cited by
Diffusion decision model: Current issues and history
Ratcliff, R., Smith, P. L., Brown, S. D., & McKoon, G. (2016) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2016.01.007 · Cited by 1,630
Integrating Models of Self-Regulation
Inzlicht, M., Werner, K. M., Briskin, J. L., & Roberts, B. W. (2021) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-061020-105721 · Cited by 594
Developmental Changes in Food Perception and Preference
Serrano-Gonzalez, M., Herting, M. M., Lim, S.-L., Sullivan, N. J., Kim, R., Espinoza, J., Koppin, C. M., Javier, J. R., Kim, M. S., & Luo, S. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.654200 · Cited by 19
Self-citationThe intuitive use of contextual information in decisions made with verbal and numerical quantifiers
Liu, D., Juanchich, M., Sirota, M., & Orbell, S. (2020) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1177/1747021820903439 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Sullivan, N., Hutcherson, C., Harris, A., & Rangel, A.
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-12-16
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 122-134
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- OpenAlex
- W2166987479
- Cited by
- 274
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 10.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
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.
