A fundamental limitation to the application of appetitive sensations is how they are measured. The most common approach relies on untrained individuals to self-report the sensations they experience under a given set of conditions. Investigators believe this is problematic because assumptions made about participant ratings are likely not valid. The proposed protocol will permit examination of whether training on appetite lexicon enhances the reliability of appetite ratings. Investigators also hypothesize that different preloads will induce different magnitudes of appetite sensations (hunger, fullness, desire to eat, and prospective consumption) depending on their energy density.
A fundamental limitation to the application of appetitive sensations is how they are measured. The most common approach relies on untrained individuals to self-report the sensations they experience under a given set of conditions. Investigators believe this is problematic because assumptions made about participant ratings are likely not valid. Most commonly, participants are asked to rate their hunger, desire to eat, fullness, and prospective consumption. For example, researchers have demonstrated that hunger and fullness stem from different physiological processes (e.g., different gut-peptides and neurotransmitters) and serve different purposes (eating initiation (hunger), meal termination (fullness)) and, accordingly, expect participants to rate the two sensations independently. However, participants treat them as opposite poles on a common continuum. Additionally, in focus group analysis, consumers often use researcher-defined distinct terms interchangeably (hunger=desire to eat; fullness =lack of desire to eat). However, the distinction between these sensations is clinically important. Hunger and fullness do not always change reciprocally and equally in clinical conditions. Hunger can change without a shift in fullness, and the reverse has also been reported. Investigators believe reporting sensitivity, selectivity, and reliability can be improved by training participants on the terminology of appetitive sensations prior to testing, just as any bench researcher would calibrate their instruments before measurements. The proposed protocol will permit examination of whether training on appetite lexicon enhances the reliability of appetite ratings. Investigators also hypothesize that different preloads will induce different magnitudes of appetite sensations (hunger, fullness, desire to eat, and prospective consumption) depending on their energy density.
Condition | Appetitive Behavior |
---|---|
Treatment | Lexicon training |
Clinical Study Identifier | NCT04576585 |
Sponsor | Purdue University |
Last Modified on | 1 May 2022 |
,
You have contacted , on
Your message has been sent to the study team at ,
You are contacting
Primary Contact
Additional screening procedures may be conducted by the study team before you can be confirmed eligible to participate.
Learn moreIf you are confirmed eligible after full screening, you will be required to understand and sign the informed consent if you decide to enroll in the study. Once enrolled you may be asked to make scheduled visits over a period of time.
Learn moreComplete your scheduled study participation activities and then you are done. You may receive summary of study results if provided by the sponsor.
Learn moreEvery year hundreds of thousands of volunteers step forward to participate in research. Sign up as a volunteer and receive email notifications when clinical trials are posted in the medical category of interest to you.
Sign up as volunteer
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur, adipisicing elit. Ipsa vel nobis alias. Quae eveniet velit voluptate quo doloribus maxime et dicta in sequi, corporis quod. Ea, dolor eius? Dolore, vel!
No annotations made yet
Congrats! You have your own personal workspace now.