Premium
Effect of Snack Choice on Pre‐Meal Hunger and Post‐Meal Satiety in College Freshmen
Author(s) -
Eastep Ashley C,
Kern Shelby E,
Schmitz Sophie A,
Sebranek Phoebe L,
Hoppe Megan B,
Scott Hattie J,
Horwath Irina E,
Wilson Ted
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.31.1_supplement.796.13
Subject(s) - cafeteria , meal , ingestion , medicine , zoology , psychology , food science , chemistry , biology , pathology
Post adolescent weight gain is a concern among college freshman, especially those enrolled in cafeteria meal plans. Snack consumption prior to a meal could alter feeding behavior during the meal. Healthy college students (n=57; 18.3 ± 0.05 years old) received one of three treatments 60 minutes before choosing and eating a cafeteria dinner meal: no snack (NS; control), 190 Cal of gummi bear candy (GB) or a 190 Cal of California walnuts(CW) 60 minutes prior to dinner in single cross‐over fashion on 3 of 5 semi‐consecutive nights. Hunger, fullness, desire to eat, and future eating plans were evaluated using a survey consisting of a visual analog scale 0 (low)‐10 cm (high) immediately before choosing their cafeteria meal (PRE) and immediately after meal ingestion (POST). Data expressed as mean ± SEM with statistical significance between treatments and parameters indicated by different letters (A or B). Desire to eat PRE for NS, GB, CW was 7.8 ± 0.3, 6.7 ± 0.3, and 6.5 ± 0.3, and desire to eat POST for NS, GB, CW was 0.9 ± 0.2, 0.8 ± 0.1, and 1.1 ± 0.3, with no significant differences within PRE or POST. Desire to eat PRE‐POST difference was significant for NS (A), GB (B), CW(B). Hunger PRE for NS, GB, CW was 7.5 ± 0.3, 6.5 ± 0.3, and 6.7 ± 0.3, and hunger POST for NS, GB, CW was 1.2 ± 0.3, 0.9 ± 0.2, and 0.8 ± 0.2, with no significant differences within PRE or POST. Fullness PRE for NS, GB, CW was 1.4 ± 0.3, 2.4 ± 0.3, and 2.2 ± 0.2, and fullness POST for NS, GB, CW was 7.9 ± 0.3, 8.3 ± 0.2, and 0.8 ± 0.2, with no significant differences within PRE or POST. Future eating plans PRE for NS, GB, CW was 6.8 ± 0.3, 6.4 ± 0.3, and 1.7 ± 0.2, and future eating plans POST for NS, GB, CW was 0.6 ± 0.1, 1.0 ± 0.2, and 0.7 ± 0.2, with no significant differences within PRE or POST. In conclusion snack choice does not appear to greatly influence feelings of a desire to eat, hunger, fullness, or future eating plans before or after a cafeteria dinner. Future studies may wish to complete the study on three consecutive days. Support or Funding Information Supported by California Walnut Commission