What is the evidence for “food addiction?” A systematic review
Open accessAbstract
The diagnostic construct of “food addiction” is a highly controversial subject. The current systematic review is the first to evaluate empirical studies examining the construct of “food addiction” in humans and animals. Studies were included if they were quantitative, peer-reviewed, and in the English language. The 52 identified studies (35 articles) were qualitatively assessed to determine the extent to which their findings indicated the following addiction characteristics in relation to food: brain reward dysfunction, preoccupation, risky use, impaired control, tolerance/withdrawal, social impairment, chronicity, and relapse. Each pre-defined criterion was supported by at least one study. Brain reward dysfunction and impaired control were supported by the largest number of studies (n = 21 and n = 12, respectively); whereas risky use was supported by the fewest (n = 1). Overall, findings support food addiction as a unique construct consistent with criteria for other substance use disorder diagnoses. The evidence further suggests that certain foods, particularly processed foods with added sweeteners and fats, demonstrate the greatest addictive potential. Though both behavioral and substance-related factors are implicated in the addictive process, symptoms appear to better fit criteria for substance use disorder than behavioral addiction. Future research should explore social/role impairment, preoccupation, and risky use associated with food addiction and evaluate potential interventions for prevention and treatment.
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
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.
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?
With such strong evidence of overlapping pathways between drugs of abuse and food, it is surprising that food has not been investigated as a long-term modulator of reward pathways in humans.
“With such strong evidence of overlapping pathways between drugs of abuse and food (220), it is surprising that food has not been investigated as a long-term modulator of reward pathways in humans.”
From A Biopsychosocial Overview of the Opioid Crisis: Considering Nutrition and Gastrointestinal Health (2019) · cites this paper as [220]
Evidence supports the validity of food addiction as a diagnostic construct, particularly as it relates to foods high in added sweeteners and refined ingredients.
“Evidence supports the validity of FA as a diagnostic construct, particularly as it relates to foods high in added sweeteners and refined ingredients [235].”
From Separating the Signal from the Noise: How Psychiatric Diagnoses Can Help Discern Food Addiction from Dietary Restraint (2020) · cites this paper as [235]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 79 · Cited by 316
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [15]English Oxford Living Dictionaries Available online: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/addicted (accessed on 6 December 2017)
- Authors
- Gordon, E., Ariel-Donges, A., Bauman, V., & Merlo, L.
- Affiliations
- University of Florida Health (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gordon, Eliza
- Venue
- Nutrients
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2018-04-12
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 477
- ISSN
- 2072-6643 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5946262
- OpenAlex
- W2797928790
- Cited by
- 316
- References
- 79
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 81 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 6
- FWCI
- 6.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Nutrients (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- University of Florida
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
- Keywords
- food addiction, impaired control, tolerance and withdrawal, preoccupation, social dysfunction, relapse, chronicity, processed foods, substance use disorders, behavioral addiction
- MeSH terms
- Food Addiction, Animals, Appetite Regulation, Behavior, Animal, Brain, Eating, Feeding Behavior, Humans, Neural Conduction, Synaptic Transmission, Risk Factors, Risk-Taking, Social Behavior, Cost of Illness, Models, Animal
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