↓ Skip to main content

Preference for Safe Over Risky Options in Binge Eating

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Preference for Safe Over Risky Options in Binge Eating
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00065
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rémi Neveu, Elsa Fouragnan, Franck Barsumian, Edouard Carrier, Massimo Lai, Alain Nicolas, Dorine Neveu, Giorgio Coricelli

Abstract

Binge eating has been usually viewed as a loss of control and an impulsive behavior. But, little is known about the actual behavior of binging patients (prevalently women) in terms of basic decision-making under risk or under uncertainty. In healthy women, stressful cues bias behavior for safer options, raising the question of whether food cues that are perceived as threatening by binging patients may modulate patients' behaviors towards safer options. A cross-sectional study was conducted with binging patients (20 bulimia nervosa (BN) and 23 anorexia nervosa binging (ANB) patients) and two control groups (22 non-binging restrictive (ANR) anorexia nervosa patients and 20 healthy participants), without any concomitant impulsive disorder. We assessed decisions under risk with a gambling task with known probabilities and decisions under uncertainty with the balloon analog risk taking task (BART) with unknown probabilities of winning, in three cued-conditions including neutral, binge food and stressful cues. In the gambling task, binging and ANR patients adopted similar safer attitudes and coherently elicited a higher aversion to losses when primed by food as compared to neutral cues. This held true for BN and ANR patients in the BART. After controlling for anxiety level, these safer attitudes in the food condition were similar to the ones under stress. In the BART, ANB patients exhibited a higher variability in their choices in the food compared to neutral condition. This higher variability was associated with higher difficulties to discard irrelevant information. All these results suggest that decision-making under risk and under uncertainty is not fundamentally altered in all these patients.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 64 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 20 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 24%
Neuroscience 9 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 22 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 July 2016.
All research outputs
#7,523,679
of 26,367,306 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#1,114
of 3,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,264
of 317,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#25
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,367,306 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,498 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,421 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.