Alleged Approach-Avoidance Conflict for Food Stimuli in Binge Eating Disorder

作者：Leehr Elisabeth J^*; Schag Kathrin; Brinkmann Amelie; Ehlis Ann Christine; Fallgatter Andreas J; Zipfel Stephan; Giel Katrin E; Dresler Thomas

来源：PLos One, 2016, 11(4): e0152271.

DOI：10.1371/journal.pone.0152271

Objective Food stimuli are omnipresent and naturally primary reinforcing stimuli. One explanation for the intake of high amounts of food in binge eating disorder (BED) is a deviant valuation process. Valuation of food stimuli is supposed to influence approach or avoidance behaviour towards food. Focusing on self-reported and indirect (facial electromyography) valuation process, motivational aspects in the processing of food stimuli were investigated.
Methods We compared an overweight sample with BED (BED+) with an overweight sample without BED (BED-) and with normal weight controls (NWC) regarding their self-reported and indirect (via facial electromyography) valuation of food versus non-food stimuli.
Results Regarding the self-reported valuation, the BED+ sample showed a significantly stronger food-bias compared to the BED-sample, as food stimuli were rated as significantly more positive than the non-food stimuli in the BED+ sample. This self-reported valuation pattern could not be displayed in the indirect valuation. Food stimuli evoked negative indirect valuation in all groups. The BED+ sample showed the plainest approach-avoidance conflict marked by a diverging self-reported (positive) and indirect (negative) valuation of food stimuli.
Conclusions BED+ showed a deviant self-reported valuation of food as compared to BED-. The valuation process of the BED+ sample seems to be characterized by a motivational ambivalence. This ambivalence should be subject of further studies and may be of potential use for therapeutic interventions.

• 出版日期2016-4-5