Eating and weight disorders : EWD · 2026
An exploratory study on portion size estimation errors: psychological correlates of portion size estimation errors in a non-clinical sample with normal-weight.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Piccolo Mayron, Tandon Tanya, Wadji Dany Laure, Haymoz Stephanie, Mueller-Pfeiffer Christophe, Milos Gabriella, Martin-Soelch Chantal
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Accurate perception of food portion sizes is implicated in healthy eating, yet little is known about psychological correlates of portion estimation in non-clinical, normal-weight adults. This exploratory study examined whether consumption intent (self vs other) and markers of psychological processes associated with eating (dietary restraint, shape/weight overvaluation, body dissatisfaction) are associated with portion size estimation errors, and whether these errors relate to body mass index (BMI).
METHODS: Seventy-one adults (BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m2) without current or past psychiatric disorders were included. Eating psychopathology was assessed using the brief 7-item, 3-factor version of the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (Dietary Restraint, Shape/Weight Overvaluation, Body Dissatisfaction). Portion estimation was measured with the Portion Estimation Task, with images rated on a visual analog scale (0-100) under two conditions: general intent (for others) and intent-to-eat (for self). A proportional estimation error index was calculated across all non-full portion sizes relative to each participant's full-portion reference. A linear mixed model tested the effect of intent and Pearson correlations examined the association with psychological variables and BMI.
RESULTS: Consumption intent did not influence portion size estimation (p = 0.989), so conditions were combined. Estimation Error Indices were positively correlated with Dietary Restraint (r(69) = 0.27, p = 0.021), but not with Shape/Weight Overvaluation or Body Dissatisfaction. BMI correlated with Shape/Weight Overvaluation and Body Dissatisfaction, but not with Dietary Restraint or the Estimation Error Index.
CONCLUSION: In normal-weight adults without eating disorders, greater dietary restraint is associated with larger biases in portion size estimation, whereas BMI and body-related evaluative concerns primarily track weight status rather than perceptual errors in portion size estimations. Findings are exploratory and warrant replication in larger, more diverse samples.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case-control analytic studies.
METHODS: Seventy-one adults (BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m2) without current or past psychiatric disorders were included. Eating psychopathology was assessed using the brief 7-item, 3-factor version of the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (Dietary Restraint, Shape/Weight Overvaluation, Body Dissatisfaction). Portion estimation was measured with the Portion Estimation Task, with images rated on a visual analog scale (0-100) under two conditions: general intent (for others) and intent-to-eat (for self). A proportional estimation error index was calculated across all non-full portion sizes relative to each participant's full-portion reference. A linear mixed model tested the effect of intent and Pearson correlations examined the association with psychological variables and BMI.
RESULTS: Consumption intent did not influence portion size estimation (p = 0.989), so conditions were combined. Estimation Error Indices were positively correlated with Dietary Restraint (r(69) = 0.27, p = 0.021), but not with Shape/Weight Overvaluation or Body Dissatisfaction. BMI correlated with Shape/Weight Overvaluation and Body Dissatisfaction, but not with Dietary Restraint or the Estimation Error Index.
CONCLUSION: In normal-weight adults without eating disorders, greater dietary restraint is associated with larger biases in portion size estimation, whereas BMI and body-related evaluative concerns primarily track weight status rather than perceptual errors in portion size estimations. Findings are exploratory and warrant replication in larger, more diverse samples.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case-control analytic studies.