Hedonic hunger, ultra-processed food consumption, and the moderating effects of impulsivity in pregnant individuals with body mass index ≥ 25

Abstract

Evidence suggests higher hedonic hunger (preoccupation with/desire to consume food for pleasure) is associated with greater ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption in non-pregnant individuals with higher, but not lower, self-report impulsivity or delay discounting. The current study tested the association between hedonic hunger and UPF consumption, and the moderating effects of self-report impulsivity and delay discounting, during pregnancy. Individuals (N = 220) with body mass index (BMI)≥25 completed the Power of Food Scale, 24-h dietary recalls, and Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-Version 11 in early-mid pregnancy. A subset enrolled in an ancillary study (n = 143) completed a Delay Discounting Task. Linear regression and moderation models covaried for age, gestational age, pre-pregnancy BMI, and socioeconomic status. The association between hedonic hunger and UPF consumption was nonsignificant (p = 0.47). Self-report impulsivity was not a significant moderator (p = 0.11), but delay discounting was (p = 0.01). Simple slopes analysis revealed a one-unit increase in hedonic hunger was associated with 7% lower UPF intake among participants with lower (M+1SD) delay discounting (p = 0.01) and 1% higher UPF intake among those with higher (M-1SD) delay discounting (p = 0.57). Findings contrast those from research with non-pregnant samples and indicate lower delay discounting may serve as a protective factor, associated with reduced UPF consumption at higher levels of hedonic hunger, during pregnancy.

Keywords: Hedonic hunger; Impulsivity; Obesity; Overweight; Pregnancy; Ultra-processed food.

Figure 1.. Moderating effect of delay discounting on the association between hedonic hunger and ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption

Note. * indicates statistical significance (p < .05). Hedonic hunger (PFS total score) and delay discounting (AUC_DDT) were mean-centered. “Higher” (n = 37) and “lower” (n = 35) delay discounting were determined by respectively subtracting and adding 1 standard deviation (0.35) from and to the adjusted mean (0.00).

Figure 2.. Moderating effect of self-report impulsivity on the association between appetitive responses at the “food available” level and ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption

Note. * indicates statistical significance (p < .05). Appetitive responses at the “food available” level (PFS Availability subscale score) and self-report impulsivity (BIS-11 total score) were mean-centered. “Higher” (n = 35) and “lower” (n = 33) self-report impulsivity were determined by respectively adding and subtracting 1 standard deviation (10.71) to and from the adjusted mean (0.00).

Figure 3.. Moderating effect of delay discounting on the association between appetitive responses at the “food available” level and ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption

Note. * indicates statistical significance (p < .05). Appetitive responses at the “food available” level (PFS Availability subscale score) and delay discounting (AUC_DDT) were mean-centered. “Higher” (n = 37) and “lower” (n = 34) delay discounting were determined by respectively subtracting and adding 1 standard deviation (0.35) from and to the adjusted mean (0.00).