RESUMO
Normative eating cues (portion size, social factors) have a powerful impact on people's food intake, but people often fail to acknowledge the influence of these cues, instead explaining their food intake in terms of internal (hunger) or sensory (taste) cues. This study examined whether the same biases apply when making predictions about how much food a person would eat. Participants (n = 364) read a series of vignettes describing an eating scenario and predicted how much food the target person would eat in each situation. Some scenarios consisted of a single eating cue (hunger, taste, or a normative cue) that would be expected to increase intake (e.g., high hunger) or decrease intake (e.g., a companion who eats very little). Other scenarios combined two cues that were in conflict with one another (e.g., high hunger + a companion who eats very little). In the cue-conflict scenarios involving an inhibitory internal/sensory cue (e.g., low hunger) with an augmenting normative cue (e.g., a companion who eats a lot), participants predicted a low level of food intake, suggesting a bias toward the internal/sensory cue. For scenarios involving an augmenting internal/sensory cue (e.g., high hunger) and an inhibitory normative cue (e.g., a companion who eats very little), participants predicted an intermediate level of food intake, suggesting that they were influenced by both the internal/sensory and normative cue. Overall, predictions about food intake tend to reflect a general bias toward internal/sensory cues, but also include normative cues when those cues are inhibitory. If people are systematically biased toward internal, sensory, and inhibitory cues, then they may underestimate how much food they or other people will eat in many situations, particularly when normative cues promoting eating are present.