Enhanced Auditory Arousal Increases Intake of Less Palatable and Healthier Foods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two experiments were conducted to test a prediction of the arousal hypothesis that increased arousal will increase intake of less palatable and healthy foods. In both experiments, arousal was manipulated by adjusting the volume of a movie (soft, loud volume) while participants consumed foods. In Experiment 1, participants ate fresh (palatable) or stale (less palatable) popcorn during a 9-minute movie played at a soft or loud volume. Experiment 2 used the same procedures with healthier foods (carrot sticks and apple slices). Partial support for the arousal hypothesis in Experiment 1 showed that participants consumed more stale but not fresh popcorn in the loud (high arousal) versus soft (low arousal) volume group. These findings suggest that low but not high palatable foods are susceptible to manipulations of arousal. Consistent with this interpretation, Experiment 2 showed that high but not low environmental arousal increased intake of the fruits and vegetables, which are typically rated as lower in palatability compared to high fat foods. These results show that high arousal in an eating-typical environment increases intake of less palatable foods, and healthy foods (i.e., fruits and vegetables). Increasing the availability of healthier foods in a loud food environment can have a positive impact on increasing intake of fruits and vegetables in that environment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".