Appetite Lexicon Training

A fundamental limitation to the application of appetitive sensations is how they are measured. The most common approach relies on untrained individuals to self-report the sensations they experience under a given set of conditions. Investigators believe this is problematic because assumptions made about participant ratings are likely not valid. The proposed protocol will permit examination of whether training on appetite lexicon enhances the reliability of appetite ratings. Investigators also hypothesize that different preloads will induce different magnitudes of appetite sensations (hunger, fullness, desire to eat, and prospective consumption) depending on their energy density.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Appetitive Behavior
• Intervention / Treatment: Behavioral: Lexicon training

Detailed Description

A fundamental limitation to the application of appetitive sensations is how they are measured. The most common approach relies on untrained individuals to self-report the sensations they experience under a given set of conditions. Investigators believe this is problematic because assumptions made about participant ratings are likely not valid. Most commonly, participants are asked to rate their hunger, desire to eat, fullness, and prospective consumption. For example, researchers have demonstrated that hunger and fullness stem from different physiological processes (e.g., different gut-peptides and neurotransmitters) and serve different purposes (eating initiation (hunger), meal termination (fullness)) and, accordingly, expect participants to rate the two sensations independently. However, participants treat them as opposite poles on a common continuum. Additionally, in focus group analysis, consumers often use researcher-defined distinct terms interchangeably (hunger=desire to eat; fullness =lack of desire to eat). However, the distinction between these sensations is clinically important. Hunger and fullness do not always change reciprocally and equally in clinical conditions. Hunger can change without a shift in fullness, and the reverse has also been reported. Investigators believe reporting sensitivity, selectivity, and reliability can be improved by training participants on the terminology of appetitive sensations prior to testing, just as any bench researcher would calibrate their instruments before measurements. The proposed protocol will permit examination of whether training on appetite lexicon enhances the reliability of appetite ratings. Investigators also hypothesize that different preloads will induce different magnitudes of appetite sensations (hunger, fullness, desire to eat, and prospective consumption) depending on their energy density.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 100
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

• Study Contact: Name: Eunjin Cheon; Phone Number: 765-496-3607; Email: cheone@purdue.edu
• Study Contact Backup: Name: Richard Mattes, PhD; Phone Number: 765-494-0662; Email: mattes@purdue.edu

Study Locations

• United States
  • Indiana
    • West Lafayette, Indiana, United States, 47907
      • Purdue Univeristy

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years to 60 years (Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Genders Eligible for Study: All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

1. BMI 18-25 kg/m2.
2. Age 18-60 years.
3. Body weight fluctuation of <2.5kg in the past 3 months.
4. Fasting blood glucose below 6.1mmol/1 via capillary finger-stick blood sample using a SureStep glucometer (Lifescan, Milpitas, CA).
5. Regular eating pattern (i.e., reliable timing of eating events (±1 hour at least 5 days/wk - absolute pattern is less important than consistency.))
6. Willing to eat all test foods. Exclusion

Exclusion Criteria:

1. Having an acute disease.
2. Planning to initiate or terminate the use of medication known to affect appetite.
3. Diagnosed relevant chronic health conditions (e.g. diabetes, cardiovascular disease).
4. Allergies to eggs, peanuts, gluten, dairy, and carrots.
5. Age 61+ years

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Basic Science
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Single

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Appetite lexicon training group; They will get appetite lexicon training in week three.	Behavioral: Lexicon training; Participants will receive training on the lexicon of appetite on up to 3 days during the training week. This will entail reading written definitions, watching an instructional video, eating exercises and completing training exams demonstrating they understand the distinctions between appetitive terms (hunger, desire to eat, fullness, and prospective consumption). The training will require about 30 minutes to complete. To ensure the success of training, participants must verbally describe the definitions of the outcome sensations to a member of the research team and complete a written quiz with at least 90 % correct responses. Failure to satisfactorily convey understanding of the concepts will result in an offer to repeat the training 2 more times or be rejected from the study.
Active Comparator: taste Lexicon training; They will get taste lexicon training In week three.	Behavioral: Lexicon training; Participants will receive training on the lexicon of appetite on up to 3 days during the training week. This will entail reading written definitions, watching an instructional video, eating exercises and completing training exams demonstrating they understand the distinctions between appetitive terms (hunger, desire to eat, fullness, and prospective consumption). The training will require about 30 minutes to complete. To ensure the success of training, participants must verbally describe the definitions of the outcome sensations to a member of the research team and complete a written quiz with at least 90 % correct responses. Failure to satisfactorily convey understanding of the concepts will result in an offer to repeat the training 2 more times or be rejected from the study.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
specificity of responses	to measure if training in appetite descriptors leads to more specific responses in the appetite questionnaire.	start of study, day 1
specificity of responses	to measure if training in appetite descriptors leads to more specific responses in the appetite questionnaire.	study completion, 9 weeks
test reliability	measure if training in appetite descriptors will result in higher reliability in the appetite questionnaire.	start of study, day 1
test reliability	measure if training in appetite descriptors will result in higher reliability in the appetite questionnaire.	study completion, 9 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Purdue University

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): August 25, 2020
• Primary Completion (Actual): August 30, 2022
• Study Completion (Actual): December 30, 2022

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: September 10, 2020
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: September 29, 2020
• First Posted (Actual): October 6, 2020

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): March 29, 2023
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: March 28, 2023
• Last Verified: April 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Other Study ID Numbers: 2020-214

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No