Effect of snack-food proximity on intake in general population samples with higher and lower cognitive resource.

OBJECTIVE: Placing snack-food further away from people consistently decreases its consumption ("proximity effect"). However, given diet-related health inequalities, it is important to know whether interventions that alter food proximity have potential to change behaviour regardless of cognitive resource (capacity for self-control). This is often lower in those in lower socio-economic positions, who also tend to have less healthy diet-related behaviours. Study 1 aims to replicate the proximity effect in a general population sample and estimate whether trait-level cognitive resource moderates the effect. In a stronger test, Study 2 investigates whether the effect is similar regardless of manipulated state-level cognitive resource. METHOD: Participants were recruited into two laboratory studies (Study 1: n = 159; Study 2: n = 246). A bowl of an unhealthy snack was positioned near (20 cm) or far (70 cm) from the participant, as randomised. In Study 2, participants were further randomised to a cognitive load intervention. The pre-specified primary outcome was the proportion of participants taking any of the snack. RESULTS: Significantly fewer participants took the snack when far compared with near in Study 2 (57.7% vs 70.7%, ß = -1.63, p = 0.020), but not in Study 1 (53.8% vs 63.3%, X2 = 1.12, p = 0.289). Removing participants who moved the bowl (i.e. who did not adhere to protocol), increased the effect-sizes: Study 1: 39.3% vs 63.9%, X2 = 6.43, p = 0.011; Study 2: 56.0% vs 73.9%, ß = -2.46, p = 0.003. Effects were not moderated by cognitive resource. CONCLUSIONS: These studies provide the most robust evidence to date that placing food further away reduces likelihood of consumption in general population samples, an effect unlikely to be moderated by cognitive resource. This indicates potential for interventions altering food proximity to contribute to addressing health inequalities, but requires testing in real-world settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Both studies were registered with ISRCTN (Study 1 reference no.: ISRCTN46995850, Study 2 reference no.: ISRCTN14239872).

Impact of altering proximity on snack food intake in individuals with high and low executive function: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Despite attempts to improve diet at population level, people living in material and social deprivation continue to consume unhealthy diets. Executive function - the ability to regulate behaviour and resist impulses - is weaker in individuals living in deprivation. Dietary interventions that educate and persuade people to reflect on and actively change behaviour may therefore disproportionately benefit individuals who are socioeconomically advantaged and have stronger executive function, thus exacerbating inequalities in health resulting from unhealthy diets. In contrast, manipulating environmental cues, such as how far away a food is placed, does not appeal to reasoned action and is thought to operate largely outside of awareness to influence behaviour. People eat more of a food when it is placed closer to them, an effect seemingly robust to context, food quality and body-weight status. However, previous studies of this 'proximity effect' are limited by small samples consisting mainly of university staff or students, biased towards higher socio-economic position and therefore likely stronger executive function. This study aims to test the hypothesis that placing food further away from a person decreases intake of that food regardless of executive function. METHODS/DESIGN: 156 members of the general public, recruited from low and high socio-economic groups, will be randomised to one of two conditions varying in the proximity of a snack food relative to their position: 20 cm or 70 cm. Participants are told they will be taking part in a relaxation study - and are fully debriefed at the conclusion of the session. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants eating any amount of snack food and the secondary outcome is the mean amount eaten. Executive function is assessed using the Stroop task. DISCUSSION: The proposed study takes a novel step by investigating the effect of proximity on snack food intake in a general population sample consisting of those with high and low executive function, appropriately powered to detect the predicted proximity effect. If this effect occurs irrespective of executive function and socio-economic position, it may have potential to reduce inequalities patterned by socio-economic position if implemented in real-world settings such as shops or restaurants. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered with the ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN46995850 on 07 October 2015.

Ambivalence and alliance ruptures in cognitive behavioral therapy for generalized anxiety.

Client ambivalence about change (or motivation) is regarded as central to outcomes in cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). However, little research has been conducted to examine the impact of client ambivalence about change on therapy process variables such as the therapeutic alliance. Given the demonstrated limitations of self-report measures of key constructs such as ambivalence and motivation, the present study instead employed a newly adapted observational measure of client ambivalence. Client statements regarding change (change talk (CT) and counter-change talk (CCT)) were coded in early (session 1 or 2) therapy sessions of CBT for generalized anxiety disorder. The frequency of CT and CCT was then compared between clients who later experienced an alliance rupture with their therapist, and clients who did not. The results showed that clients in dyads who later experienced an alliance rupture expressed significantly more CCT at the outset of therapy than clients who did not later experience an alliance rupture. However, CT utterances did not significantly differ between alliance rupture and no-rupture groups. CCT may strain the alliance because clients expressing higher levels of CCT early in therapy may be less receptive to therapist direction in CBT. Consequently, it is recommended that clients and therapists work together to carefully address these key moments in therapy so as to prevent alliance rupture and preserve client engagement in therapy.

Cognitive and language outcomes in HIV-uninfected infants exposed to combined antiretroviral therapy in utero and through extended breast-feeding.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there is a higher risk for cognitive or language delay among HIV-exposed uninfected (HEU) children exposed to cART (zidovudine/lamivudine/lopinavir/ritonavir) in utero and through 1 year of breast-feeding (World health Organization Option B+), compared with the control children born to HIV-uninfected mothers. DESIGN: This is a double cohort study from Lusaka, Zambia. METHODS: HEU (n = 97) and control (n = 103) children aged 15-36 months were assessed on their early nonverbal problem-solving and language skills using the standardized Capute Scales. A score of less than 85 on the Capute Full-Scale Developmental Quotient (FSDQ) was considered indicative of developmental delay and was the primary outcome of interest. RESULTS: An FSDQ of less than 85 was found in eight (8.3%) of HEU participants and 15 (14.6%) of controls. In univariate logistic regressions, lower income [odds ratio (OR) = 0.93, P = 0.02], older infant age (OR = 1.08, P = 0.03), lower birth weight (OR = 0.16, P < 0.001), and less maternal education (OR = 0.41, P = 0.047) were associated with the probability of FSDQ less than 85, whereas Group (control/HEU) was not (OR = 1.88, P = 0.16). In the multivariable analysis, only lower birth weight (OR = 0.15, P < 0.001) remained associated with FSDQ less than 85. CONCLUSIONS: Our study did not support the presence of an adverse effect on cognitive and language development with prolonged antepartum and postpartum cART e/xposure. Larger studies and studies of older HEU children will be required to confirm these reassuring findings.