User:Team.slovakia/Sensory-specific satiety

Sensory-specific satiety is the behavioral phenomenon that refers to the declining satisfaction generated by the consumption of a certain type of food, and the consequent renewal in appetite resulting from the exposure to a new flavor or food. As a concept, sensory-specific satiety illustrates the role of physical stimuli in generating appetite and, more specifically, explains the significance of taste in relation to hunger. This process is most commonly illustrated by a standard buffet. People are more likely to eat a larger amount of food at a buffet because the variety of foods and flavors presented renew a sense of appetite in the individual. A study conducted by Rolls and van Duijvenvoorde in 1984 verified this process by simulating a buffet-style meal. They fed participants four meals that included sausages, bread and butter, chocolate desert, and bananas. They then fed the participants four courses of one of these foods. The results revealed a 44% increase in overall food consumption when exposed to the meals with a variety of foods.

When looking at sensory specific satiety, there are many postingestive feedback factors that could affect the palatability of a food such as energy density and nutrient composition. It was hypothesized the energy density would affect postingestive feedback which in turn would inhibit or encourage sensory specific satiety. Studies done by Birch & Deysher (1986) and B.J. Rolls et al., summarized in a paper by Raynor and Epstein, show that postingesitive feedback does not influence sensory-specific satiety very much. Since postingesitve feedback seems to have little or no affect of sensory-specific satiety, it is probable that sensory-specific satiety is more driven by external factors, such as sensory aspects of the food, than internal factors.

'

Obesity in relation to sensory-specific satiety
Studies have shown that eating monotonous meals (limited variety in food) results in long-term sensory-specific satiety. By continuing to eat similar meals, a dieter can reduce their overall food intake and use sensory-specific satiety as a tool for weight loss. On the contrary, sensory-specific satiety can also cause obesity because of the stimulation of hunger for foods of different variety. The higher energy content the food has, the less likely sensory-specific satiety will become activated.

Link to study: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W77-4GCWXW6-2&_user=38557&_coverDate=01%2F31%2F2006&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1561947724&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000004358&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=38557&md5=86e1b9be2f021e008d4073da0a6638e3&searchtype=a

Summary: In a study conducted at Brown University in 2005, researchers discovered that limiting food group variety over a long period of time (8 weeks) causes long term sensory-specific satiety. This prompts that future research should examine the beneficial aspects of monotonous meal plans as a way to lose weight. “A hypothesized mechanism for sensory-specific satiety, and potentially monotony, is habituation (Hetherington & Rolls, 1996), in which there is a decrease in response to a stimulus with repeated presentations of the stimulus. This decrease is unrelated to other nonpsychological explanations such as fatigue. Thus, when the same food is repeatedly presented, food-related responses, such as salivation and hedonics, may decrease (Raynor & Epstein, 2001). A change in food cues (e.g., greater variety) should produce a recovery of food-related responses, thereby aiding in the resumption of eating (Swithers & Hall, 1994).”

Link to study: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T0P-485CWG3-1C&_user=38557&_coverDate=07%2F31%2F1983&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1561960601&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000004358&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=38557&md5=d1cb32c8764806288dacb4d319063f36&searchtype=a

Summary: “Male and female rats were given three palatable, high energy foods either simultaneously or in succession during three 40 min courses. Both simultaneous and successive variety enhanced energy intake compared to the intake of single palatable foods, which was itself enhanced compared to the intake of chow. Rats deprived of food for 24 hr showed a compensatory increase in chow intake (84%) but only a 20% increase in intake in the single palatable food conditions, and no increase in the variety conditions. Male and female rats showed a similar response to variety and deprivation. The effect of variety on body weight was also examined in rats offered either chow, or chow and one palatable food, or chow and three palatable foods in succession (changed every 12 hr) or simultaneously, for seven weeks. All rats offered the palatable foods were hyperphagic compared to chow-fed controls. Rats given the simultaneous but not the successive variety diet were more hyperphagic than the other palatable food groups and showed significantly greater body weight and fat gains. The availability of a variety of foods is an important factor in the amount eaten in the meal and in the etiology of obesity.”