On March 15, 2020, the Dutch Government implemented COVID-19 lockdown measures. Although self-quarantine and social-distancing measures were implemented, restrictions were less severe compared to several other countries. The aim of this study was to assess changes in eating behavior and food purchases among a representative adult sample in the Netherlands (n = 1030), five weeks into lockdown. The results show that most participants did not change their eating behaviors (83.0%) or food purchases (73.3%). However, socio-demographic differences were observed among those that reported changes during lockdown. For example, participants with overweight (OR = 2.26, 95%CI = 1.24–4.11) and obesity (OR = 4.21, 95%CI = 2.13–8.32) were more likely to indicate to eat unhealthier during lockdown compared to participants with a healthy weight. Those with a high educational level (OR = 2.25, 95%-CI = 1.03–4.93) were also more likely to indicate to eat unhealthier during lockdown compared to those with a low educational level. Older participants were more likely to indicate to experience no differences in their eating behaviors compared to those of younger age, who were more likely to indicate that they ate healthier (OR = 1.03, 95%CI = 1.01–1.04) as well as unhealthier (OR = 1.04, 95%CI = 1.02–1.06) during lockdown. Participants with obesity were more likely to indicate to purchase more chips/snacks (OR = 2.79, 95%CI = 1.43–5.45) and more nonalcoholic beverages (OR = 2.74, 95%CI = 1.36–5.50) during lockdown in comparison with those with a healthy weight. Of those that used meal delivery services before, 174 (29.5%) indicated to use meal delivery services more frequently during lockdown. Although the results confirm the persistence of dietary routines, profound socio-demographic differences were observed for those that did report changes. Especially for individuals with overweight and obesity, the lockdown has taken its toll on healthy dietary choices. Further research should unravel underlying mechanisms for these observations.

Self‐control is of invaluable importance for well‐being. While previous research has focused on self‐control failure, we introduce a new perspective on self‐control, including the notion of effortless self‐control, and a focus on self‐control success rather than failure. We propose that effortless strategies of dealing with response conflict (i.e., competing behavioral tendencies) are what distinguishes successful self‐controllers from less successful ones. While people with high trait self‐control may recognize the potential for response conflict in self‐control dilemmas, they do not seem to subjectively experience this conflict as much as people with low self‐control. Two strategies may underlie this difference: avoidance of response conflict through adaptive, habitual behaviors, and the efficient downregulating of response conflict. These strategies as well as the role of response conflict are elaborated upon and discussed in the light of existing literature on self‐control.

BackgroundFood literacy refers to the capability to make healthy food choices in different contexts, settings and situations. The aim of this study is to develop and validate the self-perceived food literacy (SPFL) scale, to assess individuals’ level of food literacy, including a knowledge, skills and behavior to plan, manage, select, prepare and eat food healthfully.MethodsAn initial set of 50 items for the SPFL scale were generated based on expert insights and literature. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among a sample of Dutch adults (n = 755) in order to determine convergent, divergent and criterion validation against psychosocial variables that were expected to correlate with food literacy (self-control, impulsiveness) and against the expected outcome of high food literacy, namely healthy food consumption. Principal Component Analyses (PCA), Pearson correlation tests and linear regression analyses were conducted. The capacity to distinguish of the SPFL scale was determined by comparing SPFL scores of the general population with that of a sample of dieticians (n = 207).ResultsThe participants in the general sample had an average age of 44.8 (SD:16.1), the majority were women (90.7%), they had a healthy weight (61.4%) and were highly educated (59.1%). Of the initial 50 items, 29 items remained after PCA and reflected eight domains of food literacy. SPFL was positively correlated with self-control (r = 0.51, p = <.001) and negatively with impulsiveness (r = − 0.31, p = <.01). Participants with higher levels of food literacy reported a significantly higher frequency of fruit consumption (≥5 times/week), vegetable consumption (≥5times/week) and fish consumption (≥1times/week) and consumed larger portions of fruit (≥2pieces/day) and vegetables ≥200 g/day) in comparison with participants who had lower levels of food literacy. Dieticians had slightly higher scores on SPFL than general adults (B = 0.08, SE = 0.03, t = 2.83, 95%-CI = 0.03 to 0.14).ConclusionsThe 29 item SPFL scale is a validated, expert-based and theory-driven tool for measuring self-perceived food literacy with respect to healthy eating among adults. Higher levels of food literacy were associated with more self-control, less impulsiveness and healthier food consumption. Additional research is needed to validate the SPFL scale in different populations (different age groups, socioeconomic groups, male populations) and in different contexts.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12966-018-0687-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objective: To discuss healthy diet from a psychological perspective by considering definitions of healthy diet in terms of consumer understanding; the health effects of specific dietary elements in terms of overweight and (chronic) illness; the prevalence of healthy diet; the psychological and environmental determinants of healthy diet; and the psychological interventions that have been designed to promote healthy diet. Design: A systematic review of the psychological literature on healthy diet. Results: Our findings suggest that consumers have a relatively poor understanding of a healthy diet. The literature also demonstrates that there is poor evidence on the health protective effects of single foods or nutrients. We further show that low SES is the single consistent risk factor for not adhering to a healthy diet. Our review of the literature on determinants demonstrates that intentions, habits, self-regulatory skills, and the social and physical environment are the most important determinants of a healthy diet, which are in turn amenable to change by intervention strategies with varying levels of effectiveness. Educational interventions generally show a limited effect on practising a healthy diet whereas interventions targeting habitual behaviour and/or the physical environment seem more promising. Conclusions: In view of the large number of people who are concerned about their diets and make attempts to change their dietary patterns, we conclude that it is crucial to gain a better understanding of both the automatic and environmental influences that are responsible for people not acting upon their good intentions for diet change.

In contrast to prevailing beliefs, recent research suggests that trait self-control promotes health behavior not because those high in self-control are more successful at resisting single temptations, but rather because they develop adaptive habits. The present paper presents a first empirical test of this novel suggestion by investigating the mediating role of habit in explaining the relation between self-control and unhealthy snacking behavior. Results showed that self-control was negatively associated with unhealthy snack consumption and unhealthy snacking habits. As hypothesized, the relation between self-control and unhealthy snack intake was mediated by habit strength. Self-control was not associated with fruit consumption or fruit consumption habits. These results provide the first evidence for the notion that high self-control may influence the formation of habits and in turn affect behavior. Moreover, results imply that self-control may be particularly influential in case of inhibiting unhealthy food intake rather than promoting healthy food intake.