Alleged approach-avoidance conflict for food stimuli in binge eating disorder

• Verfasst von: Leehr, Elisabeth Johanna [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Giel, Katrin [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: Alleged approach-avoidance conflict for food stimuli in binge eating disorder
• Verf.angabe: Elisabeth J. Leehr, Kathrin Schag, Amelie Brinkmann, Ann-Christine Ehlis, Andreas J. Fallgatter, Stephan Zipfel, Katrin E. Giel, Thomas Dresler
• E-Jahr: 2016
• Jahr: April 5, 2016
• Fussnoten: Gesehen am 11.11.2019
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: PLOS ONE
• Ort Quelle: San Francisco, California, US : PLOS, 2006
• Jahr Quelle: 2016
• Band/Heft Quelle: 11(2016,4) Artikle-Nummer e0152271, 15 Seiten
• ISSN Quelle: 1932-6203
• DOI: doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152271
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• Sach-SW: Behavior
• Sach-SW: Depression
• Sach-SW: Eating
• Sach-SW: Eating disorders
• Sach-SW: Eating habits
• Sach-SW: Electromyography
• Sach-SW: Emotions
• Sach-SW: Face
• K10plus-PPN: 1681624885

Abstract

Objective Food stimuli are omnipresent and naturally primary reinforcing stimuli. One explanation for the intake of high amounts of food in binge eating disorder (BED) is a deviant valuation process. Valuation of food stimuli is supposed to influence approach or avoidance behaviour towards food. Focusing on self-reported and indirect (facial electromyography) valuation process, motivational aspects in the processing of food stimuli were investigated. Methods We compared an overweight sample with BED (BED+) with an overweight sample without BED (BED-) and with normal weight controls (NWC) regarding their self-reported and indirect (via facial electromyography) valuation of food versus non-food stimuli. Results Regarding the self-reported valuation, the BED+ sample showed a significantly stronger food-bias compared to the BED- sample, as food stimuli were rated as significantly more positive than the non-food stimuli in the BED+ sample. This self-reported valuation pattern could not be displayed in the indirect valuation. Food stimuli evoked negative indirect valuation in all groups. The BED+ sample showed the plainest approach-avoidance conflict marked by a diverging self-reported (positive) and indirect (negative) valuation of food stimuli. Conclusions BED+ showed a deviant self-reported valuation of food as compared to BED-. The valuation process of the BED+ sample seems to be characterized by a motivational ambivalence. This ambivalence should be subject of further studies and may be of potential use for therapeutic interventions.