Steven Morris St. Mary’s College of Maryland

April 30, 2012

Emotion RegulationA strength-based model (Whiteside, Chen, Neighbors, Hunter, Lo, & Larimer, 2007)

(Baumeister & Heatherton, 1996) StandardsMonitoring Operation

Dysfunctional Emotion RegulationUnderregulation - A failure to exert self-control; an inadequate strength to counteract an unwanted thought, feeling, or impulse.

Awareness, attention, and planning (Chambers, Gullone, & Allen, 2009; Masuda, Price, & Latzman, 2011)

Overriding and resisting temptation (van den Bos & de Ridder, 2006; Whiteside et al., 2007)

Dysfunctional Emotion RegulationMisregulation - Misguided regulation that may be effortful but is not effective at controlling the emotion.

Learned pleasure association (Evers, Stok, & de Ridder, 2009; Kemp & Kopp, 2011; van den Bos & de Ridder, 2006)

Ideal effort to impose will (Chambers et al., 2009)

Focusing on short-term fix (Tomarken & Kirschenbaum, 1984)

Emotional EatingDefinition: “The tendency of certain individuals to overeat in response to negative emotions” (Evers et al. 2009)

Emotional Eating Scale (EES) (Arnow, Kenardy, & Agras, 1994)

Dietary Restraint Chronic dieting with periods of binge eating.

Disinhibition hypothesis (Ruderman, 1986; Tomarken & Kirschenbaum, 1984)

Escape from self-awareness theory of binge eating (Heatherton, et al., 1998)

Restrained eaters show a higher prevalence of emotional eating (Evers, de Ridder, & Adriaanse, 2009; Whiteside et al., 2007)

Cognitive Emotion Regulation Antecedent vs. Response Strategies Cognitive reappraisal as adaptive (Evers et al., 2009; Kemp & Kopp, 2011; Lavender & Anderson, 2009; Chambers, Gullone, & Allen, 2009)

Expressive suppression as maladaptive (Evers et al., 2009; Kemp & Kopp, 2011; Lavender & Anderson, 2009; Chambers, Gullone, & Allen, 2009)

Male Depression – Coping MechanismsSocial withdrawalAlcohol abuseSubstance abuseIncrease in sexual promiscuity - (Kleinke et al., 1982)

Findings of both decreased and increased snack food consumption in response to sadness (Christensen & Brooks, 2006; Macht et al., 2002)

Research QuestionsDo college age men emotionally eat?

IV1: Sad/Neutral Clip

Do cognitive emotion regulation strategies moderate emotional consumption?IV2: Emotion Suppression/Cognitive Reappraisal

Do certain emotions and cognitive emotion regulation strategies cooperate to affect eating?Interaction: Clip x Strategy

Dual Experiment DesignPhase 1 – Film Clip Emotion Induction

Phase 2 – Taste Testing Paradigm

Participant Demographics68 males

Age range: 18-43 years old (M= 20)

Ethnicity predominately White (48 White, 11 African American, 3 Hispanic, 3 Asian, 2 Other)

Laboratory space – Computer with desk space

HypothesesParticipants who experienced sadness were hypothesized to self-regulate with food and eat more than those participants who received a neutral mood induction. (Main Effect of Clip; Sad > Neutral)

Men who were instructed to cognitively reappraise would eat less than those that cognitively suppressed their emotions. (Main Effect of Strategy; Suppression > Reappraisal)

Those participants who utilized emotion suppression while viewing the sad clip would eat significantly more than those who utilized cognitive reappraisal and viewed the sad emotion clip. (Interaction: Sad x Suppression > Sad x Reappraisal)

Method – Phase 1

Method – Phase 2

Hypothesized Results

Additional ResultsMood inducing clip manipulation ineffective despite pilot study success t (65) = 1.43, p= .159.

Exploratory Analyses:Median split of post-manipulation Cheerfulness score

Cheerfulness AnalysesMedian split created High Cheer and Low Cheer score categories

Pattern of means resembled hypothesized results, but not significant

EES Depression AnalysesEES depression subscale scores significantly predicted the total amount of food eaten, b = .327, t (67) = 2.81, p = .006.

Median split of EES Depression scores into High and Low categories

Used to further examine cheerfulness pattern

Discussion and LimitationsLack of effect of cognitive emotion regulation strategy

Ineffective manipulation

Individual differences in consumption preferences (Macht et al., 2002)

Small sample size (N=68)

Future ResearchMore powerful manipulation

Selective recruitment of restrained eaters

Confine food choices to food groups that are more clearly dichotomous

Increase environmental validity

Take Away MessageHigh variability in male eating behavior

Emotional eating research requires a powerful manipulation with strong environmental validity

Emotional eating in general as well as the EES need further empirical study in college male population

AcknowledgementsDr. Jennifer Tickle (St. Mary’s College of Maryland)

Dr. Catharine Evers (Utrecht University)

Katie Phipps (St. Mary’s College of Maryland)

Questions?