Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Erschienen in: Annals of Behavioral Medicine 1/2009

01.12.2009 | Original Article

A Perspective on Eating Behaviors from the Field of Judgment and Decision Making

verfasst von: Ellen Peters, Ph.D.

Erschienen in: Annals of Behavioral Medicine | Sonderheft 1/2009

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

In this commentary, I review a key theme—the construction of preferences—that underlies the psychology of judgment and decision making and may influence eating behaviors. Its central idea is that, in many situations, we do not know what we prefer and, as a result, we construct our preferences “on the spot” based on internal and external cues available at the moment.

Purpose

To understand the extent of construction processes, one has to know both the decision maker (and how he or she draws meaning from information) and the environment she or he faces. I consider possible roles for affect and deliberation in the construction of eating preferences and also examine some existing evidence for two potentially important individual differences—numeracy (number ability) and aging.

Conclusion

Research implications concerning ways to improve eating behaviors are considered.
Literatur
1.
Lichtenstein S, Slovic P, eds. The construction of preference. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2006.
2.
Slovic P. The construction of preference. Am Psychol. 1995; 50: 364–371.CrossRef
3.
Gregory R, Lichtenstein S, Slovic P. Valuing environmental resources: A constructive approach. J Risk Uncertain. 1993; 7: 177–197.CrossRef
4.
Payne JW, Bettman JR, Schkade DA. Measuring constructed preferences: Towards a building code. J Risk Uncertain. 1999; 19: 243–270.CrossRef
5.
Ditto PH, Hawkins NA. Advance directives and cancer decision making near the end of life. Health Psychol. 2005; 24: S63–70.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Fagerlin A, Schneider CE. Enough: The failure of the living will. Hastings Cent Rep. 2004; 34: 30–42.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Epstein RM, Peters E. Beyond information: Exploring patients’ preferences. J Am Med Assoc. 2009; 302: 195–197.CrossRef
8.
Wansink B, Painter J, North J. Bottomless bowls: Why visual cues of portion size may influence intake. Obes Res. 2005; 13: 93–100.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Slovic P. Rejoinder: The perils of viscusi’s analyses of smoking risk perceptions. J Behav Decis Mak. 2000; 13: 273–276.CrossRef
10.
Peters E. The functions of affect in the construction of preferences. In: Lichtenstein S, Slovic P, eds. The construction of preference. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2006: 454–463.CrossRef
11.
Dehaene S. The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. New York: Oxford University Press; 1997.
12.
Paulos JA. Innumeracy: Mathematical illiteracy and its consequences. New York: Hill and Wang; 1988.
13.
Peters E, Dieckmann N, Västfjäll D, Mertz CK, Slovic P, Hibbard J. Bringing meaning to numbers: The impact of evaluative categories on decisions. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2009, In press.
14.
Wansink B, Kent RJ, Hoch SJ. An anchoring and adjustment model of purchase quantity decisions. J Mark Res. 1998; 35: 71–81.CrossRef
15.
Epstein S. Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. Am Psychol. 1994; 49: 709–724.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Loewenstein G, Weber EU, Hsee CK, Welch ES. Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull. 2001; 127: 267–286.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Reyna VF. How people make decisions that involve risk: A dual-processes approach. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2004; 13: 60–66.CrossRef
18.
Stanovich KE, West RF. Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? In: Gilovich T, Griffin DW, Kahneman D, eds. Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2002: 421–444.
19.
Kahneman D. A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. Am Psychol. 2003; 58: 697–720.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Damasio AR. Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Avon; 1994.
21.
Osgood CE, Suci GJ, Tannenbaum PH. The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois; 1957.
22.
Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. The affect heuristic. In: Gilovich T, Griffin D, Kahneman D, eds. Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2002: 397–420.
23.
Kahneman D, Schkade D, Sunstein CR. Shared outrage and erratic awards: The psychology of punitive damages. J Risk Uncertain. 1998; 16: 49–86.CrossRef
24.
Schwarz N, Clore GL. Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Information and directive functions of affective states. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1983; 45: 513–523.CrossRef
25.
Slovic P, Peters E. Risk perception and affect. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2006; 15: 322–325.CrossRef
26.
Wilson TD, Dunn DS, Kraft D, Lisle DJ. Introspection, attitude change, and attitude-behavior consistency: The disruptive effects of explaining why we feel the way we do. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 1989; 22: 287–343.CrossRef
27.
Shiv B, Fedorikhin A. Heart and mind in conflict: Interplay of affect and cognition in consumer decision making. J Consum Res. 1999; 26: 278–282.CrossRef
28.
29.
Peters E, Hibbard JH, Slovic P, Dieckmann N. Numeracy skill and the communication, comprehension, and use of risk-benefit information. Health Aff. 2007; 26: 741–748.CrossRef
30.
Kutner M, Greenberg E, Baer J. A first look at the literacy of America’s adults in the 21st century. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office; 2005.
31.
Lipkus IM, Samsa G, Rimer BK. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Med Decis Making. 2001; 21: 37–44.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Peters E. Numeracy and the perception and communication of risk. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008; 1128: 1–7.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Rothman RL, Housam R, Weiss H, et al. Patient understanding of food labels: the role of literacy and numeracy. Am J Prev Med. 2006; 31: 391–398.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Cavanaugh K, Huizinga MM, Wallston KA, et al. Association of numeracy and diabetes control. Ann Intern Med. 2008; 148: 737–746.PubMed
35.
Peters E, Västfjäll D, Slovic P, Mertz CK, Mazzocco K, Dickert S. Numeracy and decision making. Psychological Science. 2006; 17: 407–413.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Huizinga MM, Beech BM, Cavanaugh KL, Elasy TA, Rothman RL. Low numeracy skills are associated with higher BMI. Obesity. 2008; 16: 1966–1968.CrossRefPubMed
37.
38.
Diehr P, Bild DE, Harris TB, Duxbury A, Siscovick D, Rossi M. Body mass index and mortality in nonsmoking older adults: The cardiovascular health study. Am J Public Health. 1998; 88: 623–629.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Paquet C, St-Arnaud-McKenzie D, Kergoat M-J, Ferland G, Dubé L. Direct and indirect effects of everyday emotions on food intake of elderly patients in institutions. J Gerontol. 2003; 58A: 153–158.
40.
Salthouse TA. The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychol Rev. 1996; 103: 403–428.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Peters E, Hess TM, Västfjäll D, Auman C. Adult age differences in dual information processes: implications for the role of affective and deliberative processes in older adults’ decision making. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2007; 2: 1–23.CrossRef
42.
Hibbard JH, Slovic P, Peters E, Finucane ML, Tusler M. Is the informed-choice policy approach appropriate for Medicare beneficiaries? Health Aff. 2001; 20: 199–203.CrossRef
43.
Fung HH, Carstensen LL. Sending memorable messages to the old: Age differences in preferences and memory for emotionally meaningful advertisements. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003; 85: 163–178.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Lockenhoff CE, Carstensen LL. Aging, emotion, and health-related decision strategies: Motivational manipulations can reduce age differences. Psychol Aging. 2007; 22: 134–146.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Hess TM, Waters SJ, Bolstad CA. Motivational and cognitive influences on affective priming in adulthood. J Geront Ser B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2000; 55B: 193–204.
46.
Jacoby LL. Ironic effects of repetition: Measuring age-related differences in memory. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1999; 25: 3–22.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Tentori K, Osherson D, Hasher L, May C. Wisdom and aging: irrational preferences in college students but not older adults. Cognition. 2001; 81: 87–96.CrossRef
48.
Kim S, Hasher L. The attraction effect in decision making: superior performance by older adults. Q J Exp Psychol A, Human Exp Psychol. 2005; 58: 120–133.
49.
Johnson MMS, Drungle SC. Purchasing over-the-counter medications: The impact of age differences in information processing. Exp Aging Res. 2000; 26: 245–261.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Stephens EC, Johnson MMS. Dr. Mom and other influences on younger and older adults’ OTC medication purchases. J Appl Gerontol. 2000; 19: 441–459.CrossRef
51.
Hibbard JH, Peters E. Supporting informed consumer health care decisions: Data presentation approaches that facilitate the use of information in choice. Annu Rev Public Health. 2003; 24: 413–433.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Wood W, Neal DT. A new look at habits and the habit-goal interface. Psychol Rev. 2007; 114: 843–863.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press; 2008.
54.
Johnson EJ, Steffel M, Goldstein DG. Making better decisions: From measuring to constructing preferences. Health Psychol. 2005; 24: S17–S22.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
A Perspective on Eating Behaviors from the Field of Judgment and Decision Making
verfasst von
Ellen Peters, Ph.D.
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2009
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
Annals of Behavioral Medicine / Ausgabe Sonderheft 1/2009
Print ISSN: 0883-6612
Elektronische ISSN: 1532-4796
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-009-9121-8

Weitere Artikel der Sonderheft 1/2009

Annals of Behavioral Medicine 1/2009 Zur Ausgabe

Original Article

Obesity: Can Behavioral Economics Help?

Original Article

Appetite is a Heritable Phenotype Associated with Adiposity

Original Article

Changing Family Food and Eating Practices: The Family Food Decision-Making System

Original Article

Contributions of the Life Course Perspective to Research on Food Decision Making

Original Article

Decision Making in Eating Behavior: State of the Science and Recommendations for Future Research

Original Article

A Review of Environmental Influences on Food Choices

Neu in den Fachgebieten Neurologie und Psychiatrie

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

28.04.2024 Schwindel Nachrichten

Akuter Schwindel stellt oft eine diagnostische Herausforderung dar. Wie nützlich dabei eine MRT ist, hat eine Studie aus Finnland untersucht. Immerhin einer von sechs Patienten wurde mit akutem ischämischem Schlaganfall diagnostiziert.

Niedriger diastolischer Blutdruck erhöht Risiko für schwere kardiovaskuläre Komplikationen

25.04.2024 Hypotonie Nachrichten

Wenn unter einer medikamentösen Hochdrucktherapie der diastolische Blutdruck in den Keller geht, steigt das Risiko für schwere kardiovaskuläre Ereignisse: Darauf deutet eine Sekundäranalyse der SPRINT-Studie hin.

Frühe Alzheimertherapie lohnt sich

25.04.2024 AAN-Jahrestagung 2024 Nachrichten

Ist die Tau-Last noch gering, scheint der Vorteil von Lecanemab besonders groß zu sein. Und beginnen Erkrankte verzögert mit der Behandlung, erreichen sie nicht mehr die kognitive Leistung wie bei einem früheren Start. Darauf deuten neue Analysen der Phase-3-Studie Clarity AD.

Viel Bewegung in der Parkinsonforschung

25.04.2024 Parkinson-Krankheit Nachrichten

Neue arznei- und zellbasierte Ansätze, Frühdiagnose mit Bewegungssensoren, Rückenmarkstimulation gegen Gehblockaden – in der Parkinsonforschung tut sich einiges. Auf dem Deutschen Parkinsonkongress ging es auch viel um technische Innovationen.

Bildnachweise