Loading wiki pages...

Wiki Version:
Dual-process models integrate deliberative and impulsive mental systems, and predict dietary behaviours better than deliberative processes alone. Computerized tasks such as the Go/No-Go, Stop-Signal and Approach-Avoidance have been used as interventions to directly alter impulsive behavioural antecedents. The current meta-analysis examines the effects of these tasks on dietary behaviours, explores sample- and task-related characteristics as potential moderators of effectiveness, and examines implicit bias change as a proposed mechanism. Nineteen randomized controlled trials testing one implicit bias intervention (38 comparisons) were included in a random-effects meta-analysis, which indicated small cumulative effects on eating-related behavioural outcomes (g = -0.18, CI95 = [-0.32; -0.05], p = .008) and implicit biases (g = -0.30, CI95 = [-0.50; -0.09], p = .004). Task type moderated these effects, with Go/No-Go tasks producing larger effects than Stop-Signal or Approach-Avoidance tasks. Effects of interventions on implicit biases were positively related to effects on eating behaviour (B = 0.46, CI95 = [0.11; 0.82], p = .01). Future research should focus on Go/No-Go tasks for altering dietary behaviour via the impulsive system, and should explore effects of implicit bias interventions over longer periods of time with repeated exposures, especially in real-world as opposed to laboratory settings.
OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.