We used a novel computerized decision-making task to

ObjectivePlacing snack-food further away from people consistently decreases its consumption (“proximity effect”). However, given diet-related health inequalities, it is important to know whether interventions that alter food proximity have potential to change behaviour regardless of cognitive resource (capacity for self-control). This is often lower in those in lower socio-economic positions, who also tend to have less healthy diet-related behaviours. Study 1 aims to replicate the proximity effect in a general population sample and estimate whether trait-level cognitive resource moderates the effect. In a stronger test, Study 2 investigates whether the effect is similar regardless of manipulated state-level cognitive resource.MethodParticipants were recruited into two laboratory studies (Study 1: n = 159; Study 2: n = 246). A bowl of an unhealthy snack was positioned near (20 cm) or far (70 cm) from the participant, as randomised. In Study 2, participants were further randomised to a cognitive load intervention. The pre-specified primary outcome was the proportion of participants taking any of the snack.ResultsSignificantly fewer participants took the snack when far compared with near in Study 2 (57.7% vs 70.7%, β = −1.63, p = 0.020), but not in Study 1 (53.8% vs 63.3%, X2 = 1.12, p = 0.289). Removing participants who moved the bowl (i.e. who did not adhere to protocol), increased the effect-sizes: Study 1: 39.3% vs 63.9%, X2 = 6.43, p = 0.011; Study 2: 56.0% vs 73.9%, β = -2.46, p = 0.003. Effects were not moderated by cognitive resource.ConclusionsThese studies provide the most robust evidence to date that placing food further away reduces likelihood of consumption in general population samples, an effect unlikely to be moderated by cognitive resource. This indicates potential for interventions altering food proximity to contribute to addressing health inequalities, but requires testing in real-world settings.Trial registrationBoth studies were registered with ISRCTN (Study 1 reference no.: ISRCTN46995850, Study 2 reference no.: ISRCTN14239872).

No abstract

Abstract. State boredom – the experience of boredom in the moment – is related to a number of psychosocial issues. Until the recent creation of the Multidimensional State Boredom Scale (MSBS), research was constrained by the lack of a comprehensive, validated measure. However, the MSBS could benefit from further evaluation. To more thoroughly validate the MSBS. In two studies, participants were induced into a state of either boredom or non-boredom, and then completed the MSBS. Discriminant analysis showed that the full MSBS was able to correctly classify 68.1% (Study 2) – 84.1% (Study 1) of participants into their experimental condition. Based on further DA analysis, a subset of eight items (a potential short form) is proposed. Differential item functioning (Study 1) found only one item to which responding differed by gender. Use of the MSBS, including the full scale versus the short form, is discussed. Which experiential components of boredom may be particularly important for classifying bored individuals, and the issue of variability across boredom manipulations, are also considered.

Our study did not support the presence of an adverse effect on cognitive and language development with prolonged antepartum and postpartum cART e/xposure. Larger studies and studies of older HEU children will be required to confirm these reassuring findings.