4.5 Article

Habituation to the pleasure elicited by sweetness in lean and obese women

期刊

APPETITE
卷 58, 期 3, 页码 800-805

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2012.01.026

关键词

Habituation; Sweet taste; Obesity; Hedonics; Food pleasure; Palatability; Sensory perception

资金

  1. Pennsylvania Department of Health
  2. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [DC011287]
  3. NIH-National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) [UL1 RR024992, KL2RR024994]
  4. NIH Roadmap for Medical Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, we used a validated psychophysical tool, the hedonic general magnitude scale (hedonic gLMS), to examine whether hedonic responsivity after repetitive tasting of a sweet-tasting liquid follows a habituation pattern that is independent of adaptation to the sweet taste at the orosensory level, and whether the pattern of response is different between obese (N = 22) and lean (N = 32) women. The perceived sweet intensity and hedonic value of a 24% w/v sucrose solution was measured with the gLMS and sucrose preferences with the Monell two-series, forced-choice tracking method. Although women perceived the same intensity of sweetness across trials, obese women responded with a slower rate of habituation to the liking of repetitive sweet-taste orosensory stimulation than did lean women. Therefore, the decreased hedonic response observed in obese women cannot be explained by adaptation processes at the orosensory level or by differential perception of taste intensity or scale bias between the groups. The groups did not differ in the level of sweetness preferred. Because obesity was associated with slower patterns of habituation to the palatability elicited by sweetness in women, this characteristic could contribute to slower satiation rates, prolongation of eating episodes, and excessive food consumption in obese women. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据