EFFECTS OF FAT-CONTENT, WEIGHT, AND ACCEPTABILITY OF THE MEAL ON POSTLUNCH CHANGES IN MOOD, PERFORMANCE, AND CARDIOVASCULAR FUNCTION

Citation
A. Smith et al., EFFECTS OF FAT-CONTENT, WEIGHT, AND ACCEPTABILITY OF THE MEAL ON POSTLUNCH CHANGES IN MOOD, PERFORMANCE, AND CARDIOVASCULAR FUNCTION, Physiology & behavior, 55(3), 1994, pp. 417-422
Citations number
9
Categorie Soggetti
Behavioral Sciences",Physiology
Journal title
ISSN journal
00319384
Volume
55
Issue
3
Year of publication
1994
Pages
417 - 422
Database
ISI
SICI code
0031-9384(1994)55:3<417:EOFWAA>2.0.ZU;2-B
Abstract
This study examined the effects of fat content and meal size on postlu nch changes in mood, performance, and cardiovascular function. Forty-s ix subjects (20 males, 26 females) were tested before and after lunch. Subjects were assigned to one of the following lunch conditions: a) l ow fat (23 g), large meal (860 g); b) low fat (18 g), small meal (600 g); c) high fat (84 g), large meal (840 g); d) high fat (79 g), small meal (530 g). The results showed only small effects of fat composition and meal size, with no cardiovascular effects being observed and no e vidence of fat content or the weight of the meal influencing performan ce of logical reasoning or cognitive vigilance tasks. A few effects of meal type were significant in the mood data, but given the large numb er of analyses conducted, these could represent chance effects. Result s from two selective attention tasks showed that subjects given the hi gh-fat meals responded more slowly but more accurately, which differs from the effects of carbohydrate, protein, and calorie content reporte d in earlier papers. Weight of the meal influenced the degree of distr action from near and far distracters and also the accuracy of response s to central and peripheral targets. However, both the effects of fat and meal size were modified by task parameters, and further research i s required before firm conclusions can be drawn about the functional i mportance of the influences of nutrient content and meal size on perfo rmance. The high-fat and large meals were rated as more acceptable tha n the low-fat and small meals. These differences in acceptability coul d not, however, account for the changes in performance observed after consumption of the different meal types.