Limits...
Body weight status, eating behavior, sensitivity to reward/punishment, and gender: relationships and interdependencies.

Dietrich A, Federbusch M, Grellmann C, Villringer A, Horstmann A - Front Psychol (2014)

Bottom Line: We found an inverted U-shaped relationship between restrained eating and BMI.Independent of eating behavior, BIS and BAS responsiveness were associated with BMI in a gender-specific manner with negative relationships for men and positive relationships for women.In summary, our results demonstrate a system of linear and non-linear relationships between the investigated factors and BMI.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences Leipzig, Germany.

ABSTRACT
Behavioral and personality characteristics are factors that may jointly regulate body weight. This study explored the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and self-reported behavioral and personality measures. These measures included eating behavior (based on the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire; Stunkard and Messick, 1985), sensitivity to reward and punishment (based on the Behavioral Inhibition System/Behavioral Activation System (BIS/BAS) scales) (Carver and White, 1994) and self-reported impulsivity (based on the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11; Patton et al., 1995). We found an inverted U-shaped relationship between restrained eating and BMI. This relationship was moderated by the level of disinhibited eating. Independent of eating behavior, BIS and BAS responsiveness were associated with BMI in a gender-specific manner with negative relationships for men and positive relationships for women. Together, eating behavior and BIS/BAS responsiveness accounted for a substantial proportion of BMI variance (men: ∼25%, women: ∼32%). A direct relationship between self-reported impulsivity and BMI was not observed. In summary, our results demonstrate a system of linear and non-linear relationships between the investigated factors and BMI. Moreover, body weight status was not only associated with eating behavior (cognitive restraint and disinhibition), but also with personality factors not inherently related to an eating context (BIS/BAS). Importantly, these relationships differ between men and women.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

BMI variance explained by final regression model in men and women. The pie charts show the squared part correlations of all variables of the final BMI model in the TFEQ-plus cohort (n= 192). All variables with significant correlation to BMI were included. As the directions of the effect of BAS and BIS differed between men and women, separate models comprising the same variables were computed. R2 for women (n= 82) = 0.382. R2 for men (n= 110) = 0.300. CR, TFEQ cognitive restraint score; DIS, TFEQ disinhibition score; BAS, Behavioral Activation System total score; BIS, Behavioral Inhibition System total score; TFEQ, Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4202791&req=5

Figure 4: BMI variance explained by final regression model in men and women. The pie charts show the squared part correlations of all variables of the final BMI model in the TFEQ-plus cohort (n= 192). All variables with significant correlation to BMI were included. As the directions of the effect of BAS and BIS differed between men and women, separate models comprising the same variables were computed. R2 for women (n= 82) = 0.382. R2 for men (n= 110) = 0.300. CR, TFEQ cognitive restraint score; DIS, TFEQ disinhibition score; BAS, Behavioral Activation System total score; BIS, Behavioral Inhibition System total score; TFEQ, Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire.

Mentions: The final model comprised the relevant variables of self-reported eating behavior (see BMI Modeling based on the TFEQ Scales Cognitive Restraint and Disinhibition, TFEQ-only model) as well as BIS, BAS, gender, BIS∗gender, BAS∗gender and age as regressors. The resulting adjusted R2 was 0.271 (women: 0.324, men: 0.252). R2 for women and men did not differ significantly (p = 0.474, two-tailed Fisher’s Z). Independent of eating behavior, BIS and BAS significantly contributed to variance explanation of BMI (R2 change of TFEQ-only model and TFEQ-plus model in the sample of n= 192, p < 0.0005). Hence, self-reported behavioral measures of CR, DIS, BIS, and BAS in addition to age and gender explained about 27% of the overall variance of BMI in the population of this sample. See Figure 4 for variance proportions of the variables for each gender.


Body weight status, eating behavior, sensitivity to reward/punishment, and gender: relationships and interdependencies.

Dietrich A, Federbusch M, Grellmann C, Villringer A, Horstmann A - Front Psychol (2014)

BMI variance explained by final regression model in men and women. The pie charts show the squared part correlations of all variables of the final BMI model in the TFEQ-plus cohort (n= 192). All variables with significant correlation to BMI were included. As the directions of the effect of BAS and BIS differed between men and women, separate models comprising the same variables were computed. R2 for women (n= 82) = 0.382. R2 for men (n= 110) = 0.300. CR, TFEQ cognitive restraint score; DIS, TFEQ disinhibition score; BAS, Behavioral Activation System total score; BIS, Behavioral Inhibition System total score; TFEQ, Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4202791&req=5

Figure 4: BMI variance explained by final regression model in men and women. The pie charts show the squared part correlations of all variables of the final BMI model in the TFEQ-plus cohort (n= 192). All variables with significant correlation to BMI were included. As the directions of the effect of BAS and BIS differed between men and women, separate models comprising the same variables were computed. R2 for women (n= 82) = 0.382. R2 for men (n= 110) = 0.300. CR, TFEQ cognitive restraint score; DIS, TFEQ disinhibition score; BAS, Behavioral Activation System total score; BIS, Behavioral Inhibition System total score; TFEQ, Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire.
Mentions: The final model comprised the relevant variables of self-reported eating behavior (see BMI Modeling based on the TFEQ Scales Cognitive Restraint and Disinhibition, TFEQ-only model) as well as BIS, BAS, gender, BIS∗gender, BAS∗gender and age as regressors. The resulting adjusted R2 was 0.271 (women: 0.324, men: 0.252). R2 for women and men did not differ significantly (p = 0.474, two-tailed Fisher’s Z). Independent of eating behavior, BIS and BAS significantly contributed to variance explanation of BMI (R2 change of TFEQ-only model and TFEQ-plus model in the sample of n= 192, p < 0.0005). Hence, self-reported behavioral measures of CR, DIS, BIS, and BAS in addition to age and gender explained about 27% of the overall variance of BMI in the population of this sample. See Figure 4 for variance proportions of the variables for each gender.

Bottom Line: We found an inverted U-shaped relationship between restrained eating and BMI.Independent of eating behavior, BIS and BAS responsiveness were associated with BMI in a gender-specific manner with negative relationships for men and positive relationships for women.In summary, our results demonstrate a system of linear and non-linear relationships between the investigated factors and BMI.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences Leipzig, Germany.

ABSTRACT
Behavioral and personality characteristics are factors that may jointly regulate body weight. This study explored the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and self-reported behavioral and personality measures. These measures included eating behavior (based on the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire; Stunkard and Messick, 1985), sensitivity to reward and punishment (based on the Behavioral Inhibition System/Behavioral Activation System (BIS/BAS) scales) (Carver and White, 1994) and self-reported impulsivity (based on the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11; Patton et al., 1995). We found an inverted U-shaped relationship between restrained eating and BMI. This relationship was moderated by the level of disinhibited eating. Independent of eating behavior, BIS and BAS responsiveness were associated with BMI in a gender-specific manner with negative relationships for men and positive relationships for women. Together, eating behavior and BIS/BAS responsiveness accounted for a substantial proportion of BMI variance (men: ∼25%, women: ∼32%). A direct relationship between self-reported impulsivity and BMI was not observed. In summary, our results demonstrate a system of linear and non-linear relationships between the investigated factors and BMI. Moreover, body weight status was not only associated with eating behavior (cognitive restraint and disinhibition), but also with personality factors not inherently related to an eating context (BIS/BAS). Importantly, these relationships differ between men and women.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus