A qualitative study of psychological, social and behavioral barriers to appropriate food portion size control

Background: Given the worldwide prevalence of overweight and obesity, there is a clear need for meaningful practical healthy eating advice - not only in relation to food choice, but also on appropriate food portion sizes. As the majority of portion size research to date has been overwhelmingly quantitative in design, there is a clear need to qualitatively explore consumers’ views in order to fully understand how food portion size decisions are made. Using qualitative methodology this present study aimed to explore consumers’ views about factors influencing their portion size selection and consumption and to identify barriers to appropriate portion size control.

Methods: Ten focus groups with four to nine participants in each were formed with a total of 66 persons (aged 19–64 years) living on the island of Ireland. The semi-structured discussions elicited participants’ perceptions of suggested serving size guidance and explored the influence of personal, social and environmental factors on their food portion size consumption. Audiotapes of the discussions were professionally transcribed verbatim, loaded into NVivo 9, and analysed using an inductive thematic analysis procedure.
Results: The rich descriptive data derived from participants highlight that unhealthy portion size behaviors emanate from various psychological, social and behavioral factors. These bypass reflective and deliberative control, and converge to constitute significant barriers to healthy portion size control. Seven significant barriers to healthy portion size control were apparent: (1) lack of clarity and irrelevance of suggested serving size guidance; (2) guiltless eating; (3) lack of self-control over food cues; (4) distracted eating; (5) social pressures; (6) emotional eating rewards;
and (7) quantification habits ingrained from childhood.

Conclusions: Portion size control strategies should empower consumers to overcome these effects so that the consumption of appropriate food portion sizes becomes automatic and habitual.
Keywords: Food portion size, Barriers, Obesity, Consumers, Qualitative study. © 2013 Spence et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Secular trends in reported portion size of food and beverages consumed by Irish adults

The present analysis aimed to investigate the changes in the reported portion sizes (PS) of foods and beverages commonly consumed by Irish adults (18-64 years) from the North South Ireland Food Consumption Survey (NSIFCS) (1997-2001) and the National Adult Nutrition Survey (NANS) (2008-10). Food PS, which are defined as the weight of food (g) consumed per eating occasion, were calculated for comparable foods and beverages in two nationally representative cross-sectional Irish food consumption surveys and were published in NSIFCS and NANS. Repeated measure mixed model analysis compared reported food PS at the total population level as well as subdivided by sex, age, BMI and social class. A total of thirteen commonly consumed foods were examined. The analysis demonstrated that PS significantly increased for five foods ('white sliced bread', 'brown/wholemeal breads', 'all meat, cooked', 'poultry, roasted' and 'milk'), significantly decreased for three ('potatoes', 'chips/wedges' and 'ham, sliced') and did not significantly change for five foods ('processed potato products', 'bacon/ham', 'cheese', 'yogurt' and 'butter/spreads') between the NSIFCS and the NANS. The present study demonstrates that there was considerable variation in the trends in reported food PS over this period.

The role of societal norms in portion size related behaviour in Denmark and on the Island of Ireland

Purpose:
Social norms influence eating behavior, but little is known about their role in portion size-related behavior. This study
explored the role of social eating norms in Denmark (DK) and the Island of Ireland (IOI) in relation to portion size-related
behavior.

Methods:
In a survey DK (n=1063) and IOI (n=1012) respondents rated social eating norms (11 items) and portion size-related behavior
(3 items) on a 7-point scale (1=strongly disagree to 7=strongly agree). The 3 items relate to: 1) anticipating how
much will be eaten at the beginning of a meal, 2) clearing the plate, and 3) clearing the plate even when full. Sociodemographics
and eating attitudes (e.g. cognitive restraint) were measured as background variables

Results:
Two social eating factors were identified: The ‘limit intake’ norm (6 items) and the ‘plate cleaning’ norm (3 items). The
DK participants reported stronger ‘limit intake’ norms and weaker ‘plate cleaning’ norms than IOI. In both countries
females reported stronger ‘limit intake’ norms while males reported stronger ‘plate cleaning’ norms. In DK, age was
positively correlated with both social eating norm factors. The ‘limit intake’ norm had stronger association with anticipating
how much will be eaten at the beginning of a meal, but the ‘plate cleaning’ norm had stronger association with
clearing the plate. Only the ‘plate cleaning’ norm was associated with clearing the plate even when full.

Conclusions:
The social eating norms vary significantly between countries and genders. The ‘limit intake’ and ‘plate cleaning’ norms
play a role in consumers’ reported portion size-related behavior.

Factors predicting the portion size and perceived fillingness of evening meals in Danish and Iris households

Purpose:
This study explored how meal-related variables, socio-demographics and psychological predispositions affect the portion
size and perceived fillingness of an evening meal in Danish and Irish households.
Methods:
Using survey data collected in 2115 respondents from Denmark (DK) and the Island of Ireland (IOI), we compared four
sets of predictors of the portion size chosen for four evening meals (i.e. pizza/soup/chicken salad/pork meal): Biological
variables (hunger, thirst), socio-demographic variables (gender, age, BMI); psychological predispositions (cognitive
restraint, uncontrolled eating, emotional eating, general health interest) and meal-related variables (expected fillingness,
perceived healthiness, liking, frequency of consumption). We also compared five sets of predictors (the previous
four plus portion size) of perceived portion fillingness.
Results:
Portion size selections were associated mainly with demographic variables (gender, BMI) and psychological predispositions
(cognitive restraint, uncontrolled eating). In addition, only liking and sometimes expected healthiness (mealrelated
variables) appeared as drivers. Conversely, perceived portion fillingness was mostly influenced by the selected
portion size as well as expected fillingness and liking. There were some differences between meals; e.g. GHI not a
predictor for Pizza but a predictor for Chicken salad. Also some country differences were observed; emotional eating
predicted portion selection in the IOI but not DK.
Conclusions:
When making portion size selections at home, psychological predispositions, restrained and uncontrolled eating as well
as meal-related variables, liking and healthiness explained the decisions. However, surprisingly, individuals’ expected
fillingness of a food did not influence their portion size selection but was a driver of fillingness of the selected portion.

An evaluation of portion size estimation aids precision, ease of use and likelihood of future use

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to evaluate the precision, ease of use and likelihood of future use of portion size estimation aids (PSEA).

DESIGN: A range of PSEA were used to estimate the serving sizes of a range of commonly eaten foods and rated for ease of use and likelihood of future usage.

SETTING: For each food, participants selected their preferred PSEA from a range of options including: quantities and measures; reference objects; measuring; and indicators on food packets. These PSEA were used to serve out various foods (e.g. liquid, amorphous, and composite dishes). Ease of use and likelihood of future use were noted. The foods were weighed to determine the precision of each PSEA.

SUBJECTS: Males and females aged 18-64 years (n 120).

RESULTS: The quantities and measures were the most precise PSEA (lowest range of weights for estimated portion sizes). However, participants preferred household measures (e.g. 200 ml disposable cup) - deemed easy to use (median rating of 5), likely to use again in future (all scored either 4 or 5 on a scale from 1='not very likely' to 5='very likely to use again') and precise (narrow range of weights for estimated portion sizes). The majority indicated they would most likely use the PSEA preparing a meal (94 %), particularly dinner (86 %) in the home (89 %; all P<0·001) for amorphous grain foods.

CONCLUSIONS: Household measures may be precise, easy to use and acceptable aids for estimating the appropriate portion size of amorphous grain foods.

Are food-related perceptions associated with meal portion size decisions? A cross-sectional study

The purpose of this study was to test a comprehensive model of meal portion size determinants consisting of sociodemographic, psychological and food-related variables, whilst controlling for hunger and thirst.
Using cross-sectional nationally representative data collected in 2075 participants from the Island of Ireland (IoI) and Denmark (DK), eight separate hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine the association between food-related variables and meal portion size (i.e. pizza, vegetable soup, chicken salad and a pork meal) within each country. Stepwise regressions were run with physiological control measures (hunger and thirst) entered in the first step, sociodemographic variables (sex, age, body mass index (BMI)) in the second step; psychological variables (cognitive restraint, uncontrolled eating, emotional eating, general health interest (GHI)) in the third step and food-related variables (expected fillingness, liking, expected healthfulness, food familiarity) in the fourth step.
Sociodemographic variables accounted for 2-19% of the variance in meal portion sizes; psychological variables explained an additional 3-8%; and food-related variables explained an additional 2-12%. When all four variable groups were included in the regression models, liking and sometimes expected healthfulness was positively associated with meal portion size. The strongest association was for liking, which was statistically significant in both countries for all meal types. Whilst expected healthfulness was not associated with pizza portion size in either country, it was positively associated with meals that have a healthier image (vegetable soup; chicken salad and in IoI, the pork meal).
In conclusion, after considering sociodemographic and psychological variables, and the food-related variables of liking and expected healthfulness, there may be little merit in manipulating the satiating power, at least of these type of meals, to maintain or promote weight loss.
Keywords: Meal portion size; psychological variables; expected fillingness; expected healthfulness; food liking; food familiarity.

Quantifying consumer portion control practices. A cross-sectional study

The use of portion control practices has rarely been quantified. The present study aimed to: (1) explore which portion control practices are actually used by the general population and their association with cognitive restraint, demographic background and general health interest (GHI), and (2) examine how the usage of portion control practices predicts the estimated consumption of an energy dense food (i.e. pizza). Twenty-two portion control practices were rated in terms of their frequency of use from 'never' to 'very often' by a representative sample of 1012 consumers from the island of Ireland. Three factors were extracted and named: measurement-strategy scale, eating-strategy scale, and purchasing-strategy scale. The eating-strategy scale score was the highest, while the measurement-strategy scale carried the lowest frequency score. For each strategy scale score, the strongest predictor was GHI, followed by gender. Having higher GHI and being female were independently associated with more frequent portion control. Both the eating-strategy scale score and the purchasing-strategy scale score were negatively associated with pizza portion size consumption estimates. In conclusion, while this study demonstrates that the reported use of portion control practices is low, the findings provide preliminary evidence for their validity. Further studies are needed to explore how portion control practices are used in different kinds of portion size decisions and what their contribution is to the intake of food over an extended period of time.