Guest guest Posted August 14, 2005 Report Share Posted August 14, 2005 Hi All, Saccharin was used in the pdf-available below paper to test the bitterness effect on behavior dependent on stress. Are you sensitive to bitterness and what is your reaction to stress? How do we explain " the puzzling relationship between food consumption and exercise patterns, more specifically, the relationship between restricted food consumption and excessive exercise " ? Int J Eat Disord. 2003 Jul;34(1):71-82. The bitter truth: sensitivity to saccharin's bitterness predicts overactivity in highly arousable female dieters. Craig ML, Hollis KL, Dess NK. OBJECTIVE: The interaction between taste sensitivity and emotionality in rats provides a provocative view of hyperactivity. Rats that have been bred selectively for their reactivity to saccharin exhibit characteristic emotionality. When placed on restrictive diets, these rats exhibit excessive activity levels, relative to rats that are not sensitive to saccharin. Because humans who are highly arousable (i.e., reactive to environmental stimuli) also exhibit an increase in sensitivity to saccharin's bitterness, the current study evaluated whether women who are highly arousable, currently dieting, and sensitive to saccharin's bitterness engage in excessive exercise. ... RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: As hypothesized, sensitivity to saccharin's bitterness predicted overactivity in highly arousable female dieters, which reveals the multidimensionality of activity anorexia. PMID: 12772172 INTRODUCTION Human studies of physical activity provide several insights into the puzzling relation-ship between food consumption and exercise patterns, more specifically, the relationship between restricted food consumption and excessive exercise. For example, cadets reported consuming less food on days when activity was high compared with days of lower activity (Edholm, Fletcher, Widdowson, & McCance, 1955). The number of calories consumed by cadets on high-activity days was significantly lower than on days with less activity. Similarly, obese children voluntarily reduced the amount of food consumed during lunch following a prelunch exercise period (Epstein, Masek, & Marshall, 1978) and workers who engaged in light to medium work ate less than sedentary workers (Mayer, Roy, & Mitra, 1956). These data suggest an inverse relationship between food consumption and physical activity in the short term. However, because these studies necessarily must rely on correlational data, animal models have been useful in controlled evaluations of this relationship. Animal models in which a restricted food schedule results in excessive activity and paradoxically reduces food intake suggest many commonalties with the relationship between food restriction and exercise patterns in humans. For example, to explore the relationship between food schedule and physical activity in rats, food was made avail-able either continually or only for 1 hr per day, and a running wheel was either freely available or locked (Epling, Pierce, & Stefan, 1981). All rats were housed in the running wheel apparatus with an attached side cage. They were permitted free access to either space, except for those on the restricted food schedule, which were denied access to the wheel during feeding time. When food was restricted and the running wheel was available, animals showed a dramatic decrease in food consumption compared with control groups. Among rats that have been bred selectively for differential intake of saccharin solu-tions, Dess, Arnal, Chapman, Siebel, VanderWeele, and Green (2000) have shown that rats that are more sensitive to bitterness in complex tastes (i.e., low-saccharin–consuming rats [LoS]) are significantly more anxious and emotionally reactive, and more likely to develop deprivation-induced hyperactivity than rats that do not avoid the substance (i.e., high-saccharin–consuming rats [HiS]). When young adult female LoS and HiS rats are placed on restrictive diets (i.e., 1 hr per day) and a standard running wheel is available, activity increases in both lines. However, the increase in activity is more robust in LoS rats than in HiS rats. These findings support the notion that taste and affect, as well as restrictive diets, collectively trigger excessive activity. This shared mechanism has spurred human investigations. Dess and Edelheit (1998) and Dess (1991; 1993) hypothesized that individual differences in emotionality, as well as stress, should augment saccharin’s bitter taste in humans. To test this hypothesis, they gave college students a set of unsolvable anagrams to work on while a startling noise was produced, which acted as a mild stressor. Following this task, participants rated the bitterness and sweetness of four saccharin solutions. A week later, the participants completed a temperament questionnaire that measured pleasure, dominance, and arousability, a dimension of emotionality. As predicted, high emotionality (i.e., high arousability), as well as stress, enhanced saccharin’s aversive taste. Although the previous study (Dess & Edelheit, 1998) evaluated the complex relation-ship among taste, emotionality, and stress, it did not consider eating or exercise patterns. Consequently, the current study extended Dess and Edelheit’s (1998) study by evaluating whether emotionality, restrained eating, and taste predicted obligatory exercise, which is a measure of physical activity. Participants completed a self-administered questionnaire packet that assessed trait arousability, eating patterns, and exercise patterns. On another occasion, they completed a body contour drawings handout, and their weight and height were measured. They also rated the bitterness and sweetness of five saccharin solutions following a stressful event. We predicted that women who are highly arousable, cur-rently dieting, and sensitive to saccharin’s bitterness would engage in excessive exercise. We were also curious whether stress would modulate sensitivity to saccharin’s taste, as it had in a smaller, mixed-sex sample (Dess & Edelheit, 1998). .... RESULTS ....Dieting, Taste, and Affect as Predictors of Exercise The new and interesting questions addressed by this study concern the utility of individual differences in taste and temperament as predictors of obligatory exercise. The first set of analyses focused on individual differences as predictors. Sample and population means and standard deviations for the five questionnaires used in this current study are shown in Table 2. The means and standard deviations for the Trait Pleasure-displeasure, Trait Dominance-submissiveness, and Trait Arous-ability scales were similar to the population means for each scale (Mehrabian, 1994a, 1994b, 1994c, respectively ). Population means for the Restrained Eating Inventory and the Obligatory Exercise Questionnaire are not available. Although Mehrabian (1996) asserted that the three dimensions of the Pleasure-Arousal- Dominance (PAD) temperament model are nearly orthogonal, bivariate correla-tions among the three dimensions in the sample revealed significant associations. For example, Arousability was associated negatively with Pleasure-displeasure and Dominance-submissiveness was associated positively with Pleasure-displeasure, rs(235) =.207 and -0.153, ps <.05, respectively. Dess et al. (2000) found that young adult female LoS rats, which are more emotionally reactive than young adult female HiS rats, develop a more robust case of deprivation- induced hyperactivity when access to food is limited. In the current study, the interaction of dieting, affect, and taste was expected to predict exercise patterns. Tests of this prediction began with an evaluation of pairwise correlations between the total score for obligatory exercise and other measures, including restrained eating, trait arousability, pleasure, and dominance, as well as ratings of saccharin’s bitterness and sweetness at the highest saccharin concentration. Obligatory exercise was correlated significantly and positively with restrained eating, arousability, bitterness, and sweetness, rs(209)=.427, ..136, .135, and .138, respectively, ps </=.05. The strong relationship between restrained eating and obligatory exercise could be primary, with the other predictors of obligatory exercise deriving from it, as would be the case if restricted eating accounted for the taste ratings. This idea was tested in two ways. First, the pairwise correlations between restrained eating and the other predictors were examined. These tests yielded quite a different pattern from obligatory exercise. Restrained eating was not correlated with taste ratings: bitterness, r (210)=.021; sweetness, r (210)=.067, ps >.05. It was, however, correlated with all three temperament measures, with high restraint being associated with an anxiety pattern (Mehrabian, 1987), that is, predicted by high arousability, r (210)=.296; low pleasure, r (210)=.145; and low dominance, r (210)=.147. These results indicate that the relationship of obligatory exercise to taste and affect is not simply a byproduct of restricted eating. In particular, unlike restricted eating, obligatory exercise is predicted by taste ratings and, among the temperament measures, by only arousability. Next, hierarchical regression was used in an attempt to better account for obligatory exercise. Two four-step regressions were performed. In each regression, stress condition and trait pleasure were entered at the first step as control variables. At Step 2, restrained eating, a taste rating (either bitterness or sweetness), and arousability were entered. At Step 3, the two-way interactions between those variables were entered. Finally, at Step 4, the three-way interaction (Restrained eating Taste Arousability) was entered. Results for the hierarchical regression using bitterness ratings, including beta values and standard errors, incremental R2s, and significance tests, are shown in Table 3. Table 3. Hierarchical regression analysis using restrained eating, arousability, and bitterness rating to predict obligatory exercise (N=212) .............................. -------B SE t .............................. Step 1 Stress condition 0.36 1.33 0.27 Trait pleasure 0.03 0.03 1.01 Incremental R2=0.005, F(2, 208)=0.54 Step 2 Restraint 0.23 0.04 6.72* Arousability 0.01 0.02 0.52 Bitterness rating 0.07 0.04 2.18* Incremental R2=0.214, F(5, 205)=18.70* Step 3 Restraint × Arousability –0.001 0.001 –1.01 Restraint × Bitterness –0.001 0.002 –0.52 Arousability × Bitterness –0.0005 0.001 –0.48 Incremental R2=0.006, F(8, 202)=0.55 Step 4 Restraint × Arousability Bitter –0.0001 0.00001 –2.02* Incremental R2=0.015, F(9, 201)=4.09* ........................... *p <.05. The control variables were not significant predictors. At Step 2, both restrained eating and bitterness were significant positive predictors of obligatory exercise. None of the two-way interactions at Step 3 were significant, but the three-way interaction at Step 4 was significant. The three-way interaction was interpreted by repeating the regression separately for participants above versus below the median bitterness rating (Table 4). For both participants with relatively low bitterness ratings and relatively high bitterness ratings, restrained eating was a significant predictor of obligatory exercise. However, the interaction between restrained eating and arousability was significant only among participants with relatively high bitterness ratings. The interaction in this subgroup was interpreted following the procedure recommended by Cohen and Cohen (1983). Specifically, the interaction regression equation was solved for a hypothetical low arousability score and a hypothetical high arousability score. This analysis revealed a positive association between restrained eating and obligatory exercise at both low and high arousability levels, but with the slope decreasing and the y-intercept increasing at higher arousability levels. This pattern of an increasing but flattening function may indicate saturation, or a ‘‘ceiling effect,’’ at high levels of bitterness, arousability, and restrained eating. Table 4. Hierarchical regression analysis using restrained eating, arousability, and bitterness rating to predict obligatory exercise among participants with low and high bitterness ratings (N=212) ......................... ----B SE t ......................... I. Low-bitterness participants (N=105) Step 1 Stress condition 1.72 1.96 0.88 Trait pleasure 0.06 0.05 1.35 Incremental R2=0.023, F(2, 102)=1.19 Step 2 Restrained eating 0.24 0.05 4.77* Arousability 0.04 0.03 1.24 Incremental R2=0.228, F(4, 100)=15.23* Step 3 Restraint × Arousability 0.001 0.001 0.78 Incremental R2=0.005, F(5, 99)=8.38 II. High-bitterness participants (N=106) Step 1 Stress condition –0.36 1.84 –0.19 Trait pleasure –0.01 0.05 –0.29 Incremental R2=0.001, F(2, 103)=0.06 Step 2 Restrained eating –0.21 0.05 –4.35* Arousability 0.003 0.02 0.14 Incremental R2=0.17, F(4, 101)=10.08* Step 3 Restraint × Arousability –0.003 0.001 –2.29* Incremental R2=0.04, F(5, 100)=5.26* Regression equation for interaction=0.345r + 0.203a – 0.003ra + 22.22 Solution for arousability score 1 SD below mean = 0.357r + 21.49 Solution for arousability score 1 SD above mean = 0.120r + 36.52 .............................. *p <.05. The four-step hierarchical regression was repeated using sweetness ratings in place of bitterness ratings. Restrained eating was a significant predictor of obligatory exercise at Step 2, incremental R2=.204, F(5, 205)=17.62, p <.05. However, sweetness rating, neither by itself nor interacting with other variables, accounted for a significant amount of variance in obligatory exercise. These analyses reveal the multidimensionality of activity anorexia. Other factors (i.e., arousability and sensitivity to saccharin’s bitterness) interact with restrained eating to predict excessive exercise. By itself, arousability does not predict obligatory exercise but moderates the relationship among obligatory exercise, restrained eating, and bitterness. Although the amount of additional variance accounted for is modest, it suggests that investigation of factors other than restrained eating would further our understanding of activity anorexia. These results serve as an excellent springboard for future studies of the complex relationship between dispositional variables rooted in genetics and early experi-ence and eating disorders. Effects of Stress, Saccharin Concentration, and Arousability on Taste Perception Dess and Edelheit (1998) reported that stress increases sensitivity to saccharin’s bitter-ness, especially among highly arousable people. The current design included a replica-tion of the experimental manipulations (saccharin concentration, stress) used by Dess and Edelheit (1998). Figure 1 shows the mean bitterness ratings for the five saccharin solutions in the stress and no-stress conditions. To determine if stress increased sensitivity to saccharin’s bitterness, a 2 × 5 mixed design ANOVA was performed. The main effect for solution concentration was significant, F(4, 848)=10.267, p <.05; bitterness rating increased with solution concentration. Like-wise, the Concentration Condition interaction was significant, F(4, 848)=2.827, p <.05; the concentration of the saccharin solution and the stress condition in which the solutions were tasted jointly affected bitterness ratings. However, contrary to Dess and Edelheit (1998), the mean bitterness rating for the strongest solution, Solution 5, in the stress con-dition was lower than the mean bitterness rating for the same solution in the no-stress condition. Finally, the main effect for condition was not significant, F(1, 212)=0.000, p >.05; stress did not modulate sensitivity to saccharin’s bitterness. Effects of Arousability and Stress on Taste Perceptions Figure 2 shows the mean bitterness ratings at the highest saccharin solution concentra-tion (Solution 5) for high and low arousability women in the stress and no-stress condi-tions. Although the mean bitterness ratings for high and low arousability women in the stress and no-stress conditions are slightly different, the ANOVA revealed that the difference was not statistically significant. Dess and Edelheit (1998) found that arousability and stress modulated sensitivity to saccharin’s bitterness. To determine if stress increased bitterness ratings among highly arousable individuals in the current study, a 2 × 2 independent groups ANOVA was performed. Pleasure-displeasure was used as a covariate in this analysis because it was associated negatively with arousability. The main effect for condition was significant, F (1, 209)=4.560, p <.05; stress modulated sensitivity to saccharin’s bitterness. However, contrary to Dess and Edelheit (1998), the mean bitterness rating for Solution 5 in the stress condition (M=16.62, SE=1.69) was lower than the mean bitterness rating for the same solution in the no-stress condition (M=21.67, SE=1.66). The main effect for arousability was not significant, F (1, 209)=.436, p >.05; arousability did not modulate sensitivity to saccharin’s bitterness. In addition, the Arousability Condition interaction was not significant, F (1, 210)=.753, p >.05; the interaction of arousability and stress did not modulate sensitivity to saccharin’s bitterness. Although bitterness ratings were expected to differ between high and low arousability women following a stressful event (Dess & Edelheit, 1998), they did not in the current study. DISCUSSION The current study reveals the multidimensionality of activity anorexia. Arousability and sensitivity to saccharin’s bitterness interact with eating patterns to predict excessive exercise. Although eating patterns play the biggest role in predicting activity anorexia, emotionality and sensitivity to saccharin’s bitterness also have an important role in the activity anorexia paradigm. This finding, in conjunction with the work by Dess and Edelheit (1998), not only reveals the complexity of this paradigm, but also provides evidence for a revised theory of activity anorexia. Specifically, restricted eating patterns, in conjunction with sensitivity to saccharin’s bitterness and high levels of arousability among women, reinforce the hyperactivity associated with activity anorexia. In addition to theoretical implications, these findings have clinical implications as well. For example, the current study provides a preliminary predictive model of activity anorexia, which, through additional research, may develop into a useful method for evaluating the disorder. However, additional psychometric development of this potential diagnostic tool is crucial due to ambiguity regarding the clinical distinction between women with activity anorexia and women with anorexia nervosa. Activity anorexia is a physiologically mediated disorder that produces self-starvation, whereas anorexia nervosa is a cognitive disorder that also produces self-starvation (Pierce & Epling, 1994). In addition, excessive exercise is characteristic of many patients with clinically diagnosed eating disorders (Bruch, 1965; Gull, 1874; Yates, 1991). Little empirical evidence is available regarding not only clinical distinction, but also prevalence of excessive exercise among women with eating disorders (, 1997). Aside from the current findings, little is known about the relationship among eating patterns, exercise patterns, and taste in women with clinical and nonclinical chronicity. However, to a greater extent than previously imagined, it may be possible to integrate seemingly disparate reports on the relationship between taste and syndromes with affective and psychomotor components, such as depression (Amsterdam, Settle, Doty, Abelman, & Winokur, 1987; Whittemore, 1986) and anxiety (Mascie-, McManus, MacLarnon, & Lanigan, 1983). The resulting increase in understanding and awareness of the complex nature of activity anorexia will aid in mainstreaming the disorder and, subse-quently, enable clinicians to better detect, diagnose, and treat patients with the disease. Dess and Edelheit (1998) found that stress increased the sensitivity to saccharin’s bitterness. In the current study, which is only the second study to compare explicitly baseline sensory assessments with poststress sensory assessments, stress did not increase sensitivity to saccharin’s bitterness. Many of the women commented that they were not skillful at solving anagrams, suggesting that they were anxious about performing the cognitive task. Although the women in the no-stress group were not exposed to the stress manipulation (i.e., they did not have to solve three unsolvable anagrams in the presence of two startling noises), the mere fact that they were asked to perform cognitively may have elicited a stress response. Whether women were assigned to the stress or no-stress group, stress induction may have occurred before the start of the task. This may explain the similarity in bitterness ratings between the stress and no stress groups, as well as between high and low arousability women. Although researchers have begun to unravel the relationship between affect and perceptions of saccharin’s bitterness, as well as the relationship among stress, tem-perament, and perceptions of saccharin’s bitterness, the current study is the first to evaluate the complex relationship among stress, temperament, saccharin’s bitterness, eating patterns, and exercise patterns in humans. Certainly, this relationship is complex, multidimensional, and variable across cases. Because this area of research straddles many psychological subfields, including social, clinical, and behavioral, increased com-munication between these subfields may foster new insights into the etiology, activation, maintenance, and treatment of activity anorexia in all individuals. Al Pater, PhD; email: old542000@... ____________________________________________________ Start your day with - make it your home page http://www./r/hs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.