Maria Almudena Claassen , Jutta Mata , Ralph Hertwig
{"title":"The (mis-)measurement of food decisions","authors":"Maria Almudena Claassen , Jutta Mata , Ralph Hertwig","doi":"10.1016/j.appet.2025.107928","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Humans have a fascination with quantifying behaviors. While numbers can provide intriguing insights, they can also distort public perceptions and misguide policy design. This article deconstructs the popular belief that individuals make 200 mindless food-related decisions a day, offering alternative perspectives on the conceptualization and measurement of food decisions. Specifically, we argue that existing decision-making theories offer limited guidance in defining and measuring such decisions, and advocate for more precise operationalizations. We emphasize the need for contextual understanding over simplistic numerical representations, propose a comprehensive working definition of food decisions, and consider alternative methods that may be better suited to capturing the complexity and nuance of food decisions. To conclude, we advocate for methodological pluralism in studying food decisions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":242,"journal":{"name":"Appetite","volume":"209 ","pages":"Article 107928"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Appetite","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666325000819","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Humans have a fascination with quantifying behaviors. While numbers can provide intriguing insights, they can also distort public perceptions and misguide policy design. This article deconstructs the popular belief that individuals make 200 mindless food-related decisions a day, offering alternative perspectives on the conceptualization and measurement of food decisions. Specifically, we argue that existing decision-making theories offer limited guidance in defining and measuring such decisions, and advocate for more precise operationalizations. We emphasize the need for contextual understanding over simplistic numerical representations, propose a comprehensive working definition of food decisions, and consider alternative methods that may be better suited to capturing the complexity and nuance of food decisions. To conclude, we advocate for methodological pluralism in studying food decisions.
期刊介绍：
Appetite is an international research journal specializing in cultural, social, psychological, sensory and physiological influences on the selection and intake of foods and drinks. It covers normal and disordered eating and drinking and welcomes studies of both human and non-human animal behaviour toward food. Appetite publishes research reports, reviews and commentaries. Thematic special issues appear regularly. From time to time the journal carries abstracts from professional meetings. Submissions to Appetite are expected to be based primarily on observations directly related to the selection and intake of foods and drinks; papers that are primarily focused on topics such as nutrition or obesity will not be considered unless they specifically make a novel scientific contribution to the understanding of appetite in line with the journal's aims and scope.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
