Associations between shopper impulsivity and cyclical food purchasing: Results from a prospective trial of low-income households receiving monthly benefits.

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits are rapidly depleted after distribution. This phenomenon, known as the benefit cycle, is associated with poor nutrition and health outcomes. Proposed interventions targeting the benefit cycle often focus on impulsive decision-making. However, it remains unclear whether shopper impulsivity is associated with food purchasing behavior. Using data from a prospective trial, we evaluate whether shopper impulsivity is associated with food purchasing behavior before and after households receive nutrition assistance. In this study, 249 low-income households in the Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota, metropolitan area received monthly benefits for three months. Overall impulsivity and impulsivity subtraits of the primary shopper was assessed using the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11. Both total food expenditures and expenditures for two specific categories (fruits and vegetables, and foods high in added sugar) were evaluated. Generalized estimating equations were used to model household expenditures as a function of week since benefit distribution, impulsivity, and their interaction. Results showed that during the benefit period, food expenditures were cyclical and patterned by impulsivity. Shoppers with greater overall impulsivity spent $40.62 more in week 1 (p < 0.001). While more impulsive shoppers spent more on foods high in added sugar throughout the month (p < 0.05 for all weeks), no patterns were observed for fruits and vegetables. These findings suggest that greater impulsivity exacerbates cyclical food purchasing behavior. The impact of shopper impulsivity is especially notable for expenditures on foods high in added sugar. SNAP educational interventions to mitigate the benefit cycle may be strengthened by focusing on more impulsive shoppers and on strategies to reduce impulsive purchases of foods high in added sugar.

Tweeting it off: characteristics of adults who tweet about a weight loss attempt.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe adults who use Twitter during a weight loss attempt and to compare the positive and negative social influences they experience from their offline friends, online friends, and family members. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants (N=100, 80% female, mean age=37.65, SD=8.42) were recruited from Twitter. They completed a brief survey about their experiences discussing their weight loss attempt with their online and offline friends and provided responses to open-ended questions on the benefits and drawbacks of discussing weight on Twitter, Facebook, and weight-specific social networks. RESULTS: Participants rated their connections on Twitter and weight loss-specific social networks to be significantly greater sources of positive social influence for their weight loss (F(3)=3.47; p<0.001) and significantly lesser sources of negative social influence (F(3)=40.39 and F(3)=33.68 (both p<0.001)) than their offline friends, family, and Facebook friends. Greater positive social influence from Twitter and Facebook friends was associated with greater weight loss in participants' most recent weight loss attempt (r=0.30, r=0.32; p<0.01). The most commonly reported benefits of tweeting about weight loss include social support, information, and accountability. The most common drawbacks reported are that interactions were too brief and lacked personal connection. DISCUSSION: People who discuss their weight loss on Twitter report more social support and less negativity from their Twitter friends than their Facebook friends and in-person relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Online social networks should be explored as a tool for connecting patients who lack weight loss social support from their in-person relationships.

Can attention control conditions have detrimental effects on behavioral medicine randomized trials?

OBJECTIVE: Attention control (AC) conditions are used to balance nonspecific attention in randomized trials of behavioral interventions. Very little guidance about which behavioral interventions and outcomes merit AC is available in the literature. The primary aim of the present study is to demonstrate a scenario in which use of AC in a behavioral randomized trial was unnecessary and possibly detrimental. METHODS: Exploratory analyses were performed in a randomized controlled trial that tested whether a patient-centered counseling intervention reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in 355 participants with peripheral arterial disease, compared with AC and usual care (UC) conditions. The patient-centered counseling intervention was designed to activate participants to ask their physician for lipid-lowering medication and/or increase dose intensity, increase medication adherence, and reduce fat intake. The AC condition involved attention-matched telephone-delivered health education, and the UC condition consisted of an educational pamphlet. RESULTS: At 12-month follow-up, the mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol changes were -11.1 and -6.8 mg/dL in the UC and AC conditions, respectively (p=.17). The proportion of participants who increased the use or dose intensity of medication was significantly lower in AC than in UC: 17.5% versus 30.5% (p=.03). No significant difference in other outcomes was observed between AC and UC. CONCLUSIONS: AC has significantly worse medication outcomes, and there is no indication of a therapeutic effect on other end points. Implications for the use of AC in behavioral randomized trials are discussed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00217919.