4.6 Review

What Is a Snack, Why Do We Snack, and How Can We Choose Better Snacks? A Review of the Definitions of Snacking, Motivations to Snack, Contributions to Dietary Intake, and Recommendations for Improvement

Journal

ADVANCES IN NUTRITION
Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages 466-475

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.3945/an.115.009571

Keywords

appetite regulation; childhood obesity; eating behavior; food intake and appetite regulation; nutritional assessment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Around the world, adults consume energy outside of traditional meals such as breakfast, lunch, and dinner. However, because there is no consistent definition of a snack, it is unclear whether those extra eating occasions represent additional meals or snacks. The manner in which an eating occasion is labeled (e.g., as a meal or a snack) may influence other food choices an individual makes on the same day and satiety after consumption. Therefore, a clear distinction between meals and snacks is important. This review aims to assess the definition of extra eating occasions, to understand why eating is initiated at these occasions, and to determine what food choices are common at these eating occasions in order to identify areas for dietary intervention and improvement. Part I of this review discusses how snacking is defined and the social, environmental, and individual influences on the desire to snack and choice of snack. The section concludes with a brief discussion of the associations of snacking with cardiometabolic health markers, especially lipid profiles and weight. Part II addresses popular snack choices, overall snacking frequencies, and the demographic characteristics of frequent snackers in several different countries. This review concludes with a recommendation for nutrition policymakers to encourage specific health-promoting snacks that address nutrient insufficiencies and excesses.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available