1. Food Psychology: Why we eat more than we think Jim Painter PhD RD California Raisin Marketing Board Professor Eastern Illinois University

2. Obesity Trends Obesity Trends Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults BRFSS, 1990 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person)

4. Percent of Adult Females that are Obese by Country 3.4% Philippines 5% Switzerland 5.6% Thailand 6.7% Singapore 8% Malaysia 8% Tunisia 8.3% Cuba 9.9% Italy 10% Norway 10.3 Brazil 11% Netherlands 12% Sweden 13% Belgium 13.7% Canada 14% Spain 15% Mauritius 15% Iceland 15% Denmark (WHO, 2003) 16% Ireland 16% Slovakia 16.4% Peru 17% Austria 17% Latvia 17% France 17% Lithuania 18% New Zealand 18% Uruguay 18.5% Australia 19% Yugoslavia 19% Finland 20% Germany 20.9% Israel 21% Portugal 21% Hungary 21% Colombia 23% Romania 23% Scotland 23% Chile 23.5% England 25% Russia 25.1% Mexico 25.4% Argentina 26% Oman 26% Czech Republic 28% Greece 29.4% S. Africa 30% Iran 31.5% Jamaica 34% Bahrain 34% US 35.7% Paraguay 36% Curacao 36% Malta 36.5 Panama 40% Lebanon 40% Trinidid and Tobago 41% Kuwait 43.4% French Polynesia 66.3% Samoa American 74.3% Samoa -urban

5. Gary Foster Penn State ADA

6. Are poor food choices the cause? Why are Americans gaining weight I. Lack of exercise II. Sedentary lifestyles III. Stress/pressure IV. Advertising V. Genetic VI. Deep emotional needs, DR Phil VII. Haven’t found the right diet Premise for today! We lose track of how much we are eating

7. Historical Glance Young & Nestle, 2003. JADA Expanding Portion Sizes in the us Marketplace. (231-234)

8. Then and Now…Bagel 20 years ago 3 in diameter 140 calories Today 350 calories

9. Then and Now…Burger 20 years ago 333 calories Today 590 calories Monster Burger 1420 calories Web video video

10. Then and now…Fries 20 years ago 2.4 oz 210 calories Today 6.9 oz 610 calories

11. From the monster to the Riley burger

12. From Riley to more madness

13. Then and Now…Spaghetti 20 years ago 1 C. pasta-sauce w/ 3 meatballs 500 calories Today 2 C. pasta-sauce w/3 meatballs 1,025 calories

14. Value Marketing More for less money “Combo Meal” “Value Meal” Increases company profits We spend a little extra for larger portions We feel we’ve gotten a deal Is it of value to get more of something you didn’t need in the first place

15. Value Meals McDonald’s Quarter Pounder Regular vs. value meal= 660 kcal Wendy’s Double w/cheese Regular vs. Combo meal= 600 kcal Burger King Whopper Regular vs. value meal= 590 kcal 1 daily value meal = 1#/wk = 52#/yr = 3,570#

16. Calorie Comparison-7-Eleven 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 GulpBig GulpSuper BigDouble

17. Other Trends Nestle Toll House cookies recipe yields 60 vs. 100 when written in 1949

18. Portion size me Web video Super Size Me Documentaries

19. CBS Features Portion Size Me video

20. II. Size and Shape of Containers II. Size and Shape of Containers General Finding About Package Size... Study 1. Package Size Study 2. Portion Size Study 3. Serving Shapes Study 4. Shape Study #2

21. Package Size Increases Consumption People who pour from larger containers eat more than those pouring from small Consistent across 47 of 48 categories General Finding: Package Size Can Double Consumption

22. Hungry for Some Stale Movie Popcorn? Hungry for Some Stale Movie Popcorn? General Question Does portion size effect consumption? The Field Study (Chicago, IL) 2x2 Design Large vs. X-Large Popcorn (pre-weighed) Fresh vs. 10-day-old Popcorn

23. We Eat Much More from Big Containers – People eat 45-50% more from extra-large popcorn containers – They still eat 40-45% more with stale popcorn Grams Eaten 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Large Bucket Extra- Large Bucket Fresh 10 Days Old

24. Do Peripheral Cues Influence Experts with Precise Target Volumes? Do Peripheral Cues Influence Experts with Precise Target Volumes? 48 Philadelphia bartenders Given 4 tall, slender (highball) glasses or 4 short, wide (tumbler) glasses Given 4 full 1500 ml bottles and asked to pour … Split in to... Less than 5 years experience More than 5 years experience Pour gin for gin & tonic Pour rum for rum & Coke Pour vodka for vodka tonic Pour whiskey for whiskey/rocks Highball Glass Tumbler

25. 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Tall Highball Glass Short Tumbler Glass oz “When in Philadelphia, Should I Ask for a Tumbler or a Highball Glass?” Bartenders poured 28% more alcohol into tumblers than highball glasses Experience doesn’t eliminate bias < 5 years 5+ years

28. III. The effect of visibility and convenience on dietary consumption Gas stations, remember when someone else pumped the gas Fast food, remember when you had to go in

29. Amount of Candy Consumption According to Condition Painter, J., Wansink, B., Hieggelki, J. (2002). How Visibility and Convenience Influence Candy Consumption. Appetite 38, 237-238. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 on deskin desk2 meters from desk Number of candies consumed on desk in desk 2 meters from desk

30. Increase Intake when food is Visible (on desk) 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 45.00% Grapes Chocolate carrots pretzels Painter, j., Snyder, J., Rhodes, K., Deisher, C. 2008. The Effect of Visibility and Accessibility of Food on Dietary Intake. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 108, 9. p A93.

31. Accessibility and Visibility of Raisins 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Drawer (5)Desk (5)Desk (10) Placement and Portions of Raisins Average Consumption of Raisin Boxes Raisins Bags 20% ↑ 37.5% ↑ Gaydosh, B., & Painter, J. (2010). The effect of visibility and quantity of raisins on dietary intake, a pilot study. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 110(9): A32. DOI: 10.1016/j.jada.2010.06.117.

32. IV. The effect of calorie density on satiety & consumption

33. Effect of snack preloads on satiety and consumption At the pizza meal, there was a trend for lower FI after raisins compared to water (p < 0.09). However, snack (kcal) + pizza (kcal) intake was 13% lower after raisins and water compared to either grapes or the mixed snack (p < 0.04) Satiety was higher after raisins compared to water (p = 0.01) In contrast to other healthy snacks like grapes or the mixed snack, raisins increase satiety but not cumulative energy intake in children

34. Cumulative Energy intake

35. 35 Desire to eat (change in appetite per kilocalorie of the snack) after grapes was lowest during the study measurement period with all other snacks. Raisins was second.

36. V. Can Labels Change the Taste of Foods? V. Can Labels Change the Taste of Foods? Study 1. Descriptive Labels in the Cafeteria

37. Menu Items Used Red beans & rice Seafood filet Grilled chicken Chicken Parmesan Chocolate Pudding Zucchini cookies Traditional Cajun Red beans & rice Succulent Italian Seafood filet Tender Grilled chicken Home-style Chicken Parmesan Satin Dutch Chocolate Pudding Grandma’s Zucchini cookies

38. “Well, I know what I like” --> Maybe Not People evaluate descriptive foods as more favorable 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 PlainDescriptive Taste Texture Calories

39. Results: Effects are Less Strong with Desserts Taste No Label Label Desserts Main & Side Dishes

40. VI Visual cues 1.Ice cream 2.Soup

41. Do We Put More into Big Containers? Subjects were give bowls (17oz or 34oz) and serving spoons of different sizes They serves themselves as much as they desired Ounces Eaten 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 smallLarge

42. Refillable Soup Bowls Increase Consumption, but Not Perception of Consumption 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Normal Soup Bowls Refillable Soup Bowls Calories Actual Calories Consumed Estimated Calories Consumed Wansink, B., Painter, JE., North, J. 2005. Bottomless Bowls: Why Visual Cues of Portion Size May Influence Intake. Obesity Research, 13,1, 93-100.

43. VII. The effect of food selection on satiety & consumption

44. © 2012 Institute of Food Technologists44 Snack intake (kcal) was lowest after grapes and highest after cookies, compared with all other snacks.

45. Cumulative energy intake was lowest after grapes and highest after cookies, compared to all other snacks. © 2012 Institute of Food Technologists45 A

46. Raisins and Energy Levels In paired comparisons of daily energy scores between raisins and granola, raisins had higher energy scores than granola on 13 of the 14 days. This occurrence of higher energy scores with raisins over granola was statistically significant (p=0.002)

47. Raisins and Running 47 Research conducted at the University of California – Davis & published in the Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition Eating raisins provides the same workout boost as sports chews Runners that ingested raisins or sports chews ran their 5k on average one minute faster than those that consumed only water.

48. Sports and Raisin Conclusion 48 Both Raisins and Sports Jelly Beans are effective sources of fuel in the later stages of prolonged endurance exercise. Raisins are a natural, great tasting, cost-effective CHO alternative to commercial SJBs that can be used during moderate- to high-intensity endurance exercise.

49. Solution Self monitoring Know what you are eating Track what you are eating

50. Efficacy of self monitoring

52. MyFitnessPal

53. MyFitnessPal

55. Conclusion Shape of container determines consumption Visibility influences consumption Visibility of raisins increases consumption Satiety levels of foods influence consumption Pre-meal snack of raisins decreases overall consumption Food names effect consumption Visual cues to satiation influence consumption Choose correct form of food Raisins result in greater satiety than cookies Raisins produce higher energy levels than granola Track what you consume