Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-995ml Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-27T07:10:47.651Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Appetitive traits and child obesity: measurement, origins and implications for intervention

Symposium on ‘Behavioural nutrition and energy balance in the young’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 August 2008

Susan Carnell*
Affiliation:
New York Obesity Research Center, St Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA
Jane Wardle
Affiliation:
Cancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology & Public Health, University College London, London, UK
*
*Corresponding author: Susan Carnell, fax +1 212 523 4830, email susan.carnell@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Childhood obesity has multiple causes, most of them capable of explaining only one part of the problem. The population-wide impact of sedentary lifestyles and availability of energy-dense food is undeniable, but substantial individual differences in body weight persist, suggesting that individuals respond differently to the ‘obesogenic’ environment. One plausible mechanism for this variation is the early expression of appetitive traits, including low responsiveness to internal satiety signals, high responsiveness to external food cues, high subjective reward experienced when eating liked foods and preferences for energy-dense foods. Case–control studies support the existence of abnormalities in these traits among obese children compared with normal-weight children, and correlations between psychometric measures of child appetite and child weight suggest that appetitive trait profiles may not only promote obesity but also protect against it. The origins of appetitive traits are as yet uncharted, but will include both genetic and environmental influences. Parental feeding style may affect the development of appetite but the exact nature of the relevant behaviours is unclear and many studies are cross-sectional or begin late in childhood, obscuring causal relationships. Future research should explore determinants and biological mechanisms by using prospective designs beginning early in life, measuring relevant biomarkers such as gut hormones and incorporating neuroimaging and genotyping technologies. Potential clinical applications include the identification of ‘at risk’ children early in life and interventions to modify appetitive traits or ameliorate their impact on intake and weight.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2008

Abbreviations:
CEBQ

child eating-behaviour questionnaire

Obesity is increasingly a cross-generational problem, with recent data revealing that 17% of US children and adolescents exceed the 95th percentile for BMI(Reference Ogden, Carroll, Curtin, McDowell, Tabak and Flegal 1 ), and rates in other developed countries are fast catching up(Reference Wang and Lobstein 2 ). Understanding the multiple causes of childhood obesity is essential to develop targeted and effective treatment and prevention. The influence on the whole population of environmental factors such as sedentary lifestyles and constant availability of cheap energy-dense food is undoubtedly powerful(Reference Hill, Wyatt, Reed and Peters 3 , Reference Jeffery and Utter 4 ), but one remarkable feature of the epidemic is the persistence of enormous individual variation in body weight throughout the population. Individual differences may even be increasing in both children and adults, with the lean staying lean while the fat get fatter(Reference Romon, Duhamel, Collinet and Weill 5 Reference Wardle and Boniface 7 ), which indicates that individuals interact differently with the pervasively ‘obesogenic’ environment. Given that common obesity results from an imbalance between energy intake and expenditure, it is highly likely that this interaction occurs partly through individual variation in appetite and eating behaviours, and given that obesity is occurring in younger and younger children these individual differences might be expected to emerge early in life.

Appetitive traits and obesity in children

The present article will review evidence for associations between individual differences in appetite and adiposity, focusing specifically on the paediatric literature. Evidence relating to a small number of appetitive traits with potential associations with obesity will be addressed, i.e. low responsiveness to internal satiety signals such as gastric distension and changes in gut hormones (satiety responsiveness), high responsiveness to external food cues such as the smell, taste or sight of palatable food (food-cue responsiveness), the subjective reward experienced when eating liked foods (reinforcing value of food) and preferences for energy-dense foods (food preferences).

Satiety responsiveness and child obesity

Energy compensation

Case–control studies comparing obese and normal-weight adults have found support for impaired satiety responsiveness among obese individuals using a variety of behavioural methods(Reference Stunkard and Fox 8 Reference Stunkard and Kaplan 11 ), and many of these methods have now been employed in children. One test of satiety responsiveness uses a preloading paradigm and is based on the assumption that an individual who is responsive to internal satiety cues will adjust their intake at a subsequent meal according to the energy content of the preload. When presented with a test meal immediately after a preload obese 8–12 year olds show no down-regulation of intake compared with a no preload condition, while normal-weight children show ‘energy compensation’, indicative of greater satiety responsiveness(Reference Jansen, Theunissen, Slechten, Nederkoorn, Boon, Mulkens and Roefs 12 ).

A number of other studies have used community samples, enabling the examination of distribution-wide relationships between compensation ability and weight. This method may be more relevant for 21st century obesity, which is no longer confined to an ‘abnormal’ few, but instead represents a large proportion of the upper end of a weight continuum(Reference Haworth, Plomin, Carnell and Wardle 13 ). Heavier individuals are at higher risk of excess weight and future health problems than leaner individuals, and a good theory should therefore be able to explain all weight variation, not just obesity. Taking a correlational approach one study has tested adjustment of lunch meal intake following consumption of high-energy drinks compared with low-energy drinks equated for taste and has found that poorer compensation is associated with greater adiposity in 3–5-year-old girls(Reference Johnson and Birch 14 ). However, despite using very similar methods another study has failed to find a relationship with weight in a sample of 3–7 year olds (n 64)(Reference Faith, Keller, Johnson, Pietrobelli, Matz, Must, Jorge, Cooperberg, Heymsfield and Allison 15 ), and in a study using solid food preloads followed by self-selected lunches 90 min later no association between compensation and weight was found in 6–9 year olds (n 74)(Reference Cecil, Palmer, Wrieden, Murrie, Bolton-Smith, Watt, Wallis and Hetherington 16 ).

In a study by the authors the aim was to match the child age-group (3–5 years) used in the previously mentioned study that found a significant relationship(Reference Johnson and Birch 14 ) and increase the reliability of the compensation index by conducting two different preloading tests. In one test the preloads consisted of a low-energy drink compared with a high-energy version created by adding polycose, a form of carbohydrate that increases energy without affecting taste (n 95). In the other test preloads were a familiar low-energy drink (water) compared with a familiar high-energy drink (strawberry-flavoured milkshake; n 77). To maximise ecological validity, testing was conducted at the children's schools and test meals were standardised lunches eaten with peers 30 min later. BMI z scores adjusted for child age and gender were calculated using measured height and weight data, and results revealed an association between higher adiposity and poorer average compensation (S Carnell, EL Gibson and J Wardle, unpublished results).

Eating rate

Another presumed indicator of satiety responsiveness is eating rate. Slower speed of eating and deceleration of intake throughout the meal have been considered a response to the progressive triggering of internal satiety cues with consumption. Several studies comparing obese and normal-weight adults have demonstrated faster eating(Reference Meyer and Pudel 10 , Reference Stunkard and Kaplan 11 ) and in some cases a relative lack of deceleration through the meal(Reference Meyer and Pudel 10 ), with a small number of studies documenting positive associations between BMI and self-reported eating rate(Reference Otsuka, Tamakoshi and Yatsuya 17 , Reference Sasaki, Katagiri, Tsuji, Shimoda and Amano 18 ).

Results in children are mixed. In one study (n 60) school cafeteria meals were observed and obese 6 year olds were found to eat faster, take more bites and chew each bite fewer times(Reference Drabman, Cordua, Hammer, Jarvie and Horton 19 ). In a laboratory study (n 43) using a computerised eating monitor obese 11 year olds were found to eat faster over two lunchtime meals and show no deceleration towards the end of the meal(Reference Barkeling, Ekman and Rossner 20 ). This lack of deceleration has since been replicated in a wider age-range of obese children using the same methodology. Obese–normal differences in average eating rate were not found to be significant in this study (n 40), but evidence for a trend towards faster eating emerged in the obese group(Reference Lindgren, Barkeling, Hagg, Ritzen, Marcus and Rossner 21 ). Eating rate may also be influenced by the eating situation and choice of meal; in a repeated-measures study (n 80) using computerised monitoring of a standard yoghurt meal overweight children were reported to display a faster eating rate only when their mothers were present in the laboratory(Reference Laessle, Uhl and Lindel 22 ).

In a large sample (n 252) of 9–12-year-old twins participating in a cohort study of eating behaviour, physical activity and adiposity, eating rate has been examined across the weight distribution. Children were drawn from the Twins Early Development Study, a large (approximately 10 000) population-representative cohort of families with twin children. Each child was given a standard lunch meal of six sandwiches made with their preferred spread and filling and twelve slices of bread, accompanied by a mixed portion of fruit. Testing sessions were conducted within the family home and children were seated next to their twin, allowing relatively natural eating behaviour to be assessed. Lunches took place in a separate room from the researchers and were videotaped for later coding. Analysis of the number of bites taken for each minute of the meal has shown that eating rate increases systematically with BMI z score. However, obese, overweight and normal-weight children over a range of body weights display a similar pattern of deceleration (CH Llewellyn, CHM Van Jaarsveld, D Boniface, S Carnell and J Wardle, unpublished results). The findings support a pattern of lower satiety responsiveness in heavier children, although faster eating and a lack of deceleration throughout a meal could also reflect other aspects of appetite (e.g. heightened food-cue responsiveness).

Food-cue responsiveness and child obesity

Evidence for greater food-cue responsiveness in obese adults has come from a variety of sources, including behavioural studies demonstrating that obese individuals have a higher intake of palatable foods than less-palatable foods and eat in response to the time of day rather than internal hunger sensations(Reference Schachter 23 ). Studies of biomarkers have also implicated differential responsiveness in terms of greater salivary responses to tastes of palatable food(Reference Epstein, Paluch and Coleman 24 ), differential basal levels and eating-related changes in gut hormones such as leptin, ghrelin, peptide YY, cholecystokinin and glucagon-like peptide-1(Reference Huda, Wilding and Pinkney 25 ) and different patterns of brain activation in response to food stimuli(Reference Tataranni and Delparigi 26 Reference Delparigi, Chen, Salbe, Reiman and Tataranni 28 ).

To test the hypothesis in children, the ‘eating in the absence of hunger’ paradigm has been used to assess the extent to which the presence of palatable food overrides participants' internal satiety sensations(Reference Birch, Fisher and Davison 29 ). After eating to satiety at a provided meal, children are left alone for 10 min with free access to a variety of palatable snack foods (e.g. potato chips, cookies, ice cream) and a selection of toys and games, and intake is recorded. Compared with normal-weight children, intake during this paradigm is higher among children who are overweight at 5 and 7 years(Reference Birch and Fisher 30 ), among overweight children and adolescents ranging from 4 years to 19 years(Reference Fisher, Cai, Jaramillo, Cole, Comuzzie and Butte 31 ) and among children who are at high risk of obesity based on parental weight(Reference Faith, Berkowitz, Stallings, Kerns, Storey and Stunkard 32 ).

A simplified version of this paradigm is being developed for use in a non-laboratory environment. In a school-based sample of 7–9 year olds participating in the Physical Exercise and Appetite in Children Study, a large (n 348) study of eating and physical activity phenotypes relating to child weight, each participating child was presented with a bag of packaged sweet snack foods and a puzzle book for 10 min in their classrooms, directly after their normal school lunch. A similar procedure was used within home-based testing sessions in a subsample (n 316) of 9–12-year-old twins from the Twin Early Development Study, who were each provided with a snack pack and puzzle book for 10 min, after eating a standardised meal to satiety. In both studies intake was found to be positively correlated with BMI sd scores. However, weaker associations were found among females than males, possibly as a result of social desirability perceptions among the overweight girls(Reference Hill, Saxton, Webber, Purslow and Wardle 33 ).

Measurement of biological indicators of food-cue responsiveness is promising in adults and even more so in children, for whom relevant biomarkers may predict later obesity risk. Ethical approval for invasive protocols such as taking blood samples is not easily granted, however, and fewer studies exist. Measuring salivary flow via oral swabs is relatively acceptable to both children and parents, and may provide an index of food-cue responsivity. However, one study has revealed no increases in flow following exposure to the sight and smell of large dishes of palatable snack foods in either obese or normal-weight children(Reference Jansen, Theunissen, Slechten, Nederkoorn, Boon, Mulkens and Roefs 12 ), although obese children subsequently show greater intake. Neuroimaging studies in children present the methodological problems of anatomical differences and restricting motion in the scanner(Reference Davidson, Thomas and Casey 34 ), but children with Prader-Willi syndrome have shown post-meal increases in activity on functional MRI scans in the orbitofrontal cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, insula, hippocampus and parahippocampal gyrus compared with decreases in normal-weight children(Reference Holsen, Zarcone, Thompson, Brooks, Anderson, Ahluwalia, Nollen and Savage 35 ), and the same research group has recently found similar hyperactivation of motivation and reward areas in children with common obesity (AS Bruce, LM Holsen, R Chambers, L Martin, WM Brooks and CR Savage, unpublished results).

Food reward, food choices and child obesity

Food reward

The subjective reward experienced when consuming palatable foods is likely to be a potent motivator for intake. One method for measuring subjective reward is based on behaviour economic principles and tests how much work (e.g. key presses) the participant will do to win a specified ‘reward’ (e.g. palatable food) compared with an alternative reward (e.g. less-palatable food, physical activity). A concurrent schedule of reinforcement is applied, in which winning the item of interest becomes progressively harder while the work required to win the alternative item remains constant. The point at which the participant begins to work for the alternative reward provides an index of the reinforcing value of the item of interest(Reference Epstein, Leddy, Temple and Faith 36 ). Few studies have used this paradigm to compare obese and normal-weight individuals, but one study has found that obese adults work longer for palatable snack foods before switching to liked sedentary activities(Reference Saelens and Epstein 37 ), and another study has found that overweight children show a slower decline in responding for food over a 20 min period than do normal-weight children(Reference Temple, Giacomelli, Roemmich and Epstein 38 ).

In terms of biological indicators it is interesting that the heightened brain activation in obese compared with normal-weight adults(Reference Tataranni and Delparigi 26 Reference Delparigi, Chen, Salbe, Reiman and Tataranni 28 ) and children (AS Bruce, LM Holsen, R Chambers, L Martin, WM Brooks and CR Savage, unpublished results) is centred on reward-related areas including the orbitofrontal cortex and insular cortex. There is also evidence for higher general reward sensitivity in obese individuals(Reference Davis, Strachan and Berkson 39 ), possibly reflected in levels of dopamine receptors and activity(Reference Epstein and Leddy 40 , Reference Wang, Volkow, Thanos and Fowler 41 ), and this association may extend to adolescents as well as adults(Reference Nederkoorn, Braet, Van Eijs, Tanghe and Jansen 42 ).

Food preferences

Another way in which obese individuals may differ from normal-weight individuals is in patterns of food preference. It is easier to overconsume energy-dense foods than foods of low energy density, e.g. fruits and vegetables(Reference Rolls, Drewnowski and Ledikwe 43 ), and numerous studies document higher weight and risk of overweight among individuals with a high-energy-density diet(Reference Ledikwe, Blanck, Kettel, Serdula, Seymour, Tohill and Rolls 44 Reference Quatromoni, Copenhafer, D'Agostino and Millen 46 ). Since liking is an important predictor of intake, obese individuals might therefore be expected to like energy-dense foods more and choose them over less-energy-dense alternatives.

Surprisingly little evidence is available to support higher liking of energy-dense foods in obese adults. This position could be because evolutionary forces have led to an innate or easily learned preference, for tastes associated with high energy (e.g. sweet, fatty)(Reference Levine, Kotz and Gosnell 47 ), and thus traits determining the amount eaten rather than the type of food chosen are more discriminatory. Concern for social desirability might also lead obese individuals to dampen their liking for ‘unhealthy’ foods while inflating their appraisals of ‘healthy’ alternatives. Finally, the lack of evidence could also reflect the important distinction between ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’ a food(Reference Berridge and Robinson 48 ), the latter being the more salient determinant of eating. ‘Wanting’ a food may not be captured by palatability ratings, and different paradigms could well be needed to tap into a food's relative reward value.

Relative liking of various foods could be more important in young children, who have more dislikes than adults and avoid eating those foods. In a study of families with 4–5-year-old twins selected for high obesity risk (both parents obese) or low risk (both parents lean), lower child liking for various vegetables was reported by mothers of high-risk children compared with mothers of low-risk children. Mothers' reports were indirect (presumably based on observations of their child's food choices), which makes them a questionable measure of actual child liking but potentially a better reflection of behavioural preferences jointly motivated by liking and wanting. In order to obtain direct measures of preference children were also given tastes of high-fat (cheese, chocolate, pastry) and low-fat (rye cracker, candy, carrot) foods from a range of food groups. The higher ranking of the high-fat foods by the high-risk children than by the low-risk group suggests that preferences for energy-dense foods may be a behavioural marker for future obesity(Reference Wardle, Guthrie, Sanderson, Birch and Plomin 49 ).

Psychometric measures of appetite and child obesity

Most of the research that has been described has used behavioural tests to assess appetitive traits. These tests provide objective measures of eating behaviour but cannot claim to be true trait measures as they capture behaviour on only one occasion, and often in an artificial laboratory-based context, which could elicit atypical or socially-desirable behaviour. Sample sizes are often small and the power to detect relationships with weight is consequently diminished. One alternative is to use psychometric instruments. This method could be more vulnerable to social desirability and presents the new challenges of insight and accurate recall, but may be better at tapping consistent behavioural styles. Psychometric instruments can be administered to large samples, maximising statistical power, and can be completed by parents of children who are too young to report on themselves. Parental evaluations may also reflect some social desirability bias, especially when reports concern overweight children or those with unusual eating behaviour, but have the unrivalled asset of being founded on repeated observations of their child eating.

Most studies using psychometric measures of eating behaviour are designed to detect eating disorder symptomatology, and have therefore used self-report questionnaires (Dutch eating-behaviour questionnaire(Reference Van Strien, Frijters, Bergers and Defares 50 ) and three-factor eating questionnaire(Reference Stunkard and Messick 51 )) to find that eating styles such as restraint, disinhibited eating, emotional eating and external eating differ in obese adolescents and children compared with normal-weight counterparts in middle childhood(Reference Shunk and Birch 52 Reference Lluch, Herbeth, Mejean and Siest 54 ). However, the direction of the associations is mixed, with some studies reporting lower scores on emotional and external eating scales in overweight individuals(Reference Snoek, Van Strien, Janssens and Engels 53 , Reference Lluch, Herbeth, Mejean and Siest 54 ). This disparity is likely to reflect dieting behaviour or aspirational responding, since those individuals who are concerned about their weight are known to modify their eating behaviour and reports. Examining appetite and weight in young children, using parent-report scales, may give a better reflection of the relationship between appetitive traits and weight, because children are less likely to have internalised social norms and prejudices, and therefore less likely to be dieting as a result of weight-related distress. However, only a small number of studies have followed this approach. One study has found higher external cue responsiveness in a clinical sample of obese children using a parent-report version of the Dutch eating-behaviour questionnaire(Reference Braet and Van Strien 55 ), but this result has not been replicated in a more recent community study(Reference Wardle, Guthrie, Sanderson and Rapoport 57 ).

The present authors have been using the child eating-behaviour questionnaire (CEBQ)(Reference Wardle, Guthrie, Sanderson, Birch and Plomin 49 ), a parent-report instrument designed to assess eating-behaviour styles in the normal and clinical range. Along with scales assessing other aspects of eating style (e.g. fussiness about food, emotional undereating), the CEBQ incorporates scales tapping into a number of appetitive traits with potential links to obesity. Between them the satiety responsiveness (e.g. ‘my child gets full up easily’), slowness in eating (e.g. ‘my child takes a long time to eat a meal’), food responsiveness (e.g. ‘given the choice, my child would eat most of the time’) and enjoyment of food (e.g. ‘my child enjoys eating’) items are close to the concepts of satiety responsiveness and food-cue responsiveness, and may also touch on the rewarding value of food. Each scale correlates well with behavioural tests designed to tap similar constructs (r 2 approximately 0·2 for satiety responsiveness(Reference Carnell and Wardle 58 )), and shows continuity in children from 4 years to 11 years (r approximately 0·5)(Reference Ashcroft, Semmler, Carnell, Van Jaarsveld and Wardle 59 ).

This questionnaire has been administered in two samples large enough to allow detailed exploration of relationships (3–5 year olds, n 549; 8–11 year olds, n 10 359). Preschool children and their parents were recruited from a diverse selection of preschools in London, England, and children's heights and weights were measured by trained researchers at school visits. The older children were drawn from the Twins Early Development Study and children's height, weight and waist measurements were reported by parents in a postal questionnaire. All parents completed selected scales from the CEBQ. For both groups higher adiposity was found to be associated with lower satiety responsiveness and slowness in eating scores and higher enjoyment of food, with the linearity of the association clearest in the waist circumference data for the older children(Reference Carnell and Wardle 60 ) (Fig. 1 (a and b)). Similar associations have also been observed in other cultures and child age-groups(Reference Viana, Sinde and Saxton 61 ). These results support the idea that appetitive traits are not merely abnormal in obese individuals but are also associated with weight variation throughout the population.

Fig. 1. Child eating-behaviour questionnaire satiety responsiveness scores (a) and enjoyment of food scores (b) by waist circumference group for an 8–11-year-old twin sample drawn from the Twins Early Development Study. Waist sd scores were based on UK 1990 reference data(Reference McCarthy, Jarrett and Crawley 127 ) and used to derive centile scores: thin normal group, 0th–50th centile; mid normal group, 51st–90th; high group, 91st–97th; very-high group, 98th–100th. Values are means and 95% CI represented by vertical bars. (From Carnell & Wardle(Reference Carnell and Wardle 60 ).)

Future research on child appetite and adiposity

The research that has been described is predominantly cross-sectional, and it is not possible to establish whether differences in appetitive traits cause variation in body weight. Prospective studies are needed, and should begin early, since there is evidence that infant indicators of satiety responsiveness such as milk sucking rate in the first month of life may go on to predict adiposity at 1–2 years(Reference Stunkard, Berkowitz, Stallings and Schoeller 62 ), and establishing risk status early could facilitate early intervention. Long-term prospective studies may benefit from measuring promising biomarkers. For example, one study has demonstrated lower levels of the satiety hormone peptide YY in obese children, which increase after successful weight loss(Reference Roth, Enriori, Harz, Woelfle, Cowley and Reinehr 63 ). If individual differences in fasting or pre- or postprandial levels of gut hormones linked to hunger and satiety (e.g. peptide YY, polypeptide Y, cholecystokinin, ghrelin) are found to predict subsequent weight gain, this factor would be consistent with a causal role for appetitive traits. Pre-obese differences in brain activation responses to food stimuli would provide further support.

To explore some of these possibilities, families are currently being recruited to participate in a large (approximately 2000) cohort study examining genetic and environmental influences on children's appetite and weight from birth (Genes, Environment and Maturation IN Infancy Study). Parents will complete questionnaires on anthropometric measures and children's eating style throughout development, while more detailed biological and behavioural data will be obtained in an intensively-studied subsample. Future support for appetitive traits as determinants of adiposity may also emerge from studies demonstrating weight change following appetite-targeted interventions.

Determinants of appetitive traits

If appetitive traits are determinants (rather than mere correlates or byproducts) of body weight, the crucial questions are how do they develop and can this process be influenced? Parental feeding has attracted by far the most attention as a potential determinant of children's eating behaviour. Literature in this area will be summarised and new evidence that genetic influences play an influential role will be reviewed.

Parental influences on appetitive traits

Satiety responsiveness

A central idea within the parental-feeding literature is that parents who exert high levels of control over their child's eating may unintentionally disregulate their appetite by encouraging them to eat according to external rather than internal satiety cues(Reference Savage, Fisher and Birch 64 , Reference Faith, Scanlon, Birch, Francis and Sherry 65 ). One study has found that 3–5 year olds whose parents have higher scores on a control scale (measuring pressure to eat and rigidity around mealtimes and feeding) show poorer compensation for the preload energy content(Reference Johnson and Birch 14 ). This negative association between parental control and compensation has been replicated in other samples using explicit measures of restrictive feeding(Reference Birch and Fisher 30 ).

Other studies have examined relationships between parental feeding and eating rate, hypothesising that parental pressure to eat promotes faster eating and overweight in children. In support, one observational study has found that higher eating rate in 3–5 year olds is associated with more maternal prompts to eat(Reference Drucker, Hammer, Agras and Bryson 66 ). The theory is also consistent with the finding that overweight children eat faster only when their mothers are present in the laboratory(Reference Laessle, Uhl and Lindel 22 ).

Food-cue responsiveness

Restricting children's access to fatty sugary snack foods is a common parental behaviour, but it has been hypothesised that over-restricting could increase preferences for and responses to those foods. Experimental studies emulating parental restriction by limiting children's access to a snack food have demonstrated greater intake and selection of the limited food immediately after it becomes available(Reference Fisher and Birch 67 , Reference Jansen, Mulkens and Jansen 68 ), and this response occurs both when the restricted food is initially preferred(Reference Fisher and Birch 67 ) and when it is liked no more than the non-restricted food(Reference Jansen, Mulkens and Jansen 68 ). This form of restriction may be an imperfect analogue for the ongoing limitation of energy-dense snacks practised by parents. However, child and maternal reports of restriction predict higher intake in the eating in the absence of hunger paradigm both cross-sectionally(Reference Fisher and Birch 69 ) and longitudinally(Reference Fisher and Birch 70 ) supporting some generisability of the laboratory findings. Restriction may also interact with overweight status such that girls who are overweight and whose parents restrict them are most vulnerable to the paradoxical effect(Reference Birch, Fisher and Davison 29 ).

Food preferences

Perhaps the clearest experimental support for an influence of parental feeding on children's eating comes from research on instrumental feeding. Parents commonly employ healthy foods as ‘means’ to obtain less-healthy foods or ‘ends’, sometimes simultaneously (e.g. ‘If you eat your peas, you can have ice-cream’). This approach may increase preference for the ‘end’, and have the opposite effect on the ‘means'. For example, when a teacher presents a snack food to a sample of preschool children to reward certain behaviours, preferences for that food increase(Reference Birch, Zimmerman and Hind 71 ). However, when they are repeatedly offered non-food rewards for consuming a new milk beverage, preferences decrease(Reference Birch, Marlin and Rotter 72 ). Another study in which consumption of a target snack (snack A) was rewarded with consumption of another snack (snack B) has found that children show relatively decreased preferences for snack A compared with participants given the snacks in a matching temporal order or an order of their choice(Reference Newman and Taylor 73 ).

Psychometric measures of disordered eating style

Obesity among children is a relatively new concern. Until recently, eating disorders were considered the primary scourge to be guarded against, especially among girls. Studies testing whether parental feeding could promote disordered eating have therefore assessed eating behaviour using scales from the Dutch eating-behaviour questionnaire and three-factor eating questionnaire, with mixed results. One study in a sizeable cohort of 4–6-year-old girls (n 197) has revealed positive associations between pressure to eat and restriction on one hand, and dietary restraint, emotional eating and external eating on the other(Reference Carper, Orlet and Birch 74 , Reference Van Strien and Bazelier 75 ). However, one large (n 596) survey of 7–12 year olds has shown that higher restriction is associated with lower external and emotional eating among girls(Reference Van Strien and Bazelier 75 ), suggesting that associations may differ for older children. Evidence has also come from retrospective designs. For example, one study has found that adults who recall their parents using food to reward behaviour and enforcing strict restriction are more likely to report disordered eating such as bingeing and unsuccessful dietary restraint(Reference Puhl and Schwartz 76 ). However, another study of university students has found no associations between recalled parental feeding and current eating behaviour(Reference Brunstrom, Mitchell and Baguley 77 ).

Psychometric measures of appetitive traits

The CEBQ and a combination of parental feeding questionnaires have been used to test associations between parental feeding and appetitive traits in a series of studies, including a preschool-based sample of 3–5-year-old children (n 541), a school-based sample of 9–11 year olds (n 348) and a large cohort of twins (Twins Early Development Study) surveyed at 9–11 years (n 10 359) with more detailed measures for a subsample of these families taken when twins were 4–5 years (n 400) and again when they were 9–11 years (n 340; S Carnell and J Wardle, unpublished results). Robust associations (r 0·2–0·4) have emerged across all samples, with positive relationships apparent between CEBQ food responsiveness scores and restriction, emotional feeding and instrumental feeding, and between CEBQ satiety responsiveness and parental pressure to eat (see Fig. 2 (a and b) for twin subsample data).

Fig. 2. Child eating-behaviour questionnaire food responsiveness scores by parental restriction group (a) and satiety responsiveness scores by parental pressure-to-eat group (b) for a 9–11-year-old twin sample drawn from the Twins Early Development Study. Parental feeding groups were created by dividing scores on the restriction and pressure-to-eat scales from the child feeding questionnaire(Reference Birch, Fisher, Grimm-Thomas, Markey, Sawyer and Johnson 128 ) into quartiles, with 1st group representing the lowest quartile and 4th group the highest quartile. Values are means and 95% CI represented by vertical bars.

These findings demonstrate some support for a model in which some parental feeding practices influence children's appetitive traits, but the exact nature of the relevant practices and the causal relationships between variables remain uncertain. Experimental studies use short-term substitutes for parental control, and observational and behavioural studies capture only snapshots of children's eating behaviour. The questionnaire studies have used diverse parental feeding measures preventing generalisation across studies, and have primarily sought to detect disordered eating styles, which simultaneously assess appetitive traits and individuals' attempts to control them. The majority of the studies are cross-sectional, precluding causal inference, while the retrospective evidence is vulnerable to bias and inaccuracy. The small number of existing prospective studies in the field have yet to span time periods sufficient for causes and effects to play out, and risk having ‘missed the boat’ by starting at an age at which parental influence could already have had its strongest impact.

Future research on parental feeding and child appetite

Improved parental feeding measures, many of which assess child-responsive authoritative feeding strategies, in addition to overt control of feeding, are likely to illuminate the role of parental feeding in the development of child appetite(Reference Hughes, Power, Orlet, Mueller and Nicklas 78 Reference Musher-Eizenman and Holub 81 ). Long-term prospective studies using genetically-sensitive designs may help to reveal whether feeding strategies actually influence children's appetite or simply reflect parents' responses to their child's developing eating behaviour and weight(Reference Plomin, DeFries, McClearn and McGuffin 82 ).

Consistent with growing consensus within the research community that obesity risk processes may begin to unfold at birth, or even perinatally(Reference Vickers, Krechowec and Breier 83 , Reference Wells, Chomtho and Fewtrell 84 ), studies should start as early in development as possible and incorporate detailed measures of early appetite and feeding behaviours. Breast-feeding may be associated with lower infant weight(Reference Owen, Martin, Whincup, Davey-Smith, Gillman and Cook 85 ), but the mechanisms are unknown. Some researchers have suggested that the different macronutrient composition of formula compared with breast milk could explain disregulated intake and weight gain(Reference Vickers, Breier, Cutfield, Hofman and Gluckman 86 ), but behavioural explanations should also be considered; breast-feeding may promote maternal responsiveness in feeding, allowing infants to learn how to attend to internal satiety cues(Reference Gillman, Rifas-Shiman, Camargo, Berkey, Frazier, Rockett, Field and Colditz 87 ). Other established findings also merit further investigation of mechanisms. For example, an influential hypothesis holds that foetal and early-postnatal malnutrition could lead to adaptations in glucose metabolism that increase risk of metabolic syndrome and obesity(Reference Hales and Barker 88 ). This response could occur partly through epigenetic processes whereby nutritional influences affect foetal DNA(Reference Waterland and Jirtle 89 ), but low birth weight could also elicit overfeeding in mothers responding to concern about weight.

The new cohort study of families with twins followed from birth (Genes, Environment and Maturation IN Infancy Study) will provide more information about the role of parental feeding in the development of appetite. However, this and similar studies must account for the fact that even prospective associations between parental feeding and child appetite may be the result of other variables. For example, as the child grows older and energy-dense snack foods become more accessible the parent may adjust their feeding style and the child's appetitive characteristics may also change, without being directly related to parental behaviour. It may also prove difficult to assess parents and children frequently enough to capture the bidirectional causal interplay between them although careful planning of assessments to coincide with critical periods may help.

Genetic influences on appetitive traits

Feeding is a dynamic bidirectional process. Children are not merely passive responders to parental influences, but contribute substantially to the feeding interaction(Reference Satter 90 ). Consistent with this premise, parents notice differences in eating styles between siblings and report adjusting their feeding to children's appetites and preferred ways of eating(Reference Moore, Tapper and Murphy 91 ). This dynamic adjustment begins at the milk-feeding stage and is typified by the ‘feeding on demand’ pattern adopted by many mothers(Reference Renfrew, Lang, Martin and Woolridge 92 ). It seems sensible, therefore, to consider the possibility that eating styles may show genetic influence, which could be expressed at an early stage and underlie some of the observed associations between parent feeding and child eating behaviour.

Genetic influence on adult eating style

The genetic contribution to a phenotype can be established using family or twin designs in which correlations between relatives are compared with those that would be expected from their genetic similarity. Twin designs are built on the premise that monozygotic (identical) twins share all their genes, whereas dizygotic (non-identical or fraternal) twins on average share half. If a trait is entirely genetic it would therefore be expected that the correlation would be 1 for monozygotic twins and 0·5 for dizygotic twins, and if it is entirely environmental similar correlations would be expected in dizygotic twins and monozygotic twins. Using this assumption, together with a number of others (including equally similar environments for monozygotic and dizygotic twins), twin correlations can be used to estimate the proportion of the variance in a trait that is attributable to genetic v. environmental influences, and to further separate shared environmental influences (common to each twin and making children growing up in the same family more similar) and non-shared environmental influences (unique to each twin and making children growing up in the same family different)(Reference Plomin, Asbury and Dunn 93 ).

Genetic influence on child appetite

Existing research in this area is largely confined to adults. Behavioural twin studies have indicated heritability of between 14% and 69% for indices of eating style such as daily energy intake, meal intake, energy density of the diet, pre- and post-meal hunger and pre-meal stomach contents(Reference de Castro 94 Reference de Castro 96 ), while heritability for three-factor eating questionnaire and Dutch eating-behaviour questionnaire scales range from 0% to 59% depending on study population and the measure used(Reference Neale, Mazzeo and Bulik 97 Reference Tholin, Rasmussen, Tynelius and Karlsson 99 ). However, since there is evidence for heritability of obesity in children(Reference Wardle, Carnell, Haworth and Plomin 100 ) as well as adults(Reference Maes, Neale and Eaves 101 ), and some suggestion that shared environmental influence may be stronger in young children, who still share the family home(Reference Koeppen-Schomerus, Wardle and Plomin 102 ), independent investigation of heritability of appetite in children is warranted.

One recent family study containing 801 children and adolescents from 300 Hispanic families has assessed the heritability of intake in the ‘eating in the absence of hunger’ paradigm, and reports 51% genetic influence compared with 49% environmental influence, suggesting that genes influence appetitive behaviour as early as 5 years(Reference Fisher, Cai, Jaramillo, Cole, Comuzzie and Butte 31 ). Twin studies are additionally able to distinguish between shared and non-shared environmental influences, but very few focus on behavioural measures of eating in childhood. However, the previously described study of 252 9–12-year-old twins in which standardised lunch meals administered in the family home were observed, shows high heritability of eating rate, with a modest non-shared environment effect and no evidence for a shared environment effect (CH Llewellyn, CHM Van Jaarsveld, D Boniface, S Carnell and J Wardle, unpublished results).

Psychometric questionnaires allow large amounts of data to be gathered, allowing more-accurate estimates of genetic and environmental influences. However, the scales used in the adult studies were designed to assess eating disordered behaviour and hence reflect attitudinal as well as behavioural components, making them rather blunt measures of basic appetitive dispositions, confounded by dieting behaviour and social desirability bias. The CEBQ was designed to assess fundamental appetitive traits in children via parental reports. Two CEBQ subscales (satiety responsiveness and enjoyment of food) have been administered to mothers with 8–11-year-old twins in 5435 families from Twins Early Development Study. Standard genetic model fitting has produced estimates for genetic influence, shared environment influence and non-shared environmental influence of 63%, 21% and 16% respectively for satiety responsiveness and 75%, 10% and 15% respectively for enjoyment of food(Reference Carnell, Haworth, Van Jaarsveld, Plomin and Wardle 103 ).

In another study using a subsample of 4–5-year-old twins from the same cohort (n 214) parents' reports of children's preferences for seventy-seven different foods were obtained(Reference Breen, Plomin and Wardle 104 ). Analyses by food group reveal a pattern of differing heritability estimates of 0·20 for dessert foods rising to 0·37 for vegetables, 0·51 for fruits and 0·78 for protein foods. Shared environmental effects are much higher than those for the other appetitive traits (0·64 for desserts, 0·34 for fruits, 0·51 for vegetables, 0·12 for protein foods) suggesting that exposure to certain foods and feeding styles may markedly influence food preferences at preschool age. Future research will show whether the shared childhood environments continue to influence food choices into adulthood.

Future research on genetics of child appetite

Research into the molecular genetic basis of appetite has highlighted gene loci and candidate genes meriting further investigation(Reference Steinle, Hsueh, Snitker, Pollin, Sakul, St Jean, Bell, Mitchell and Shuldiner 105 Reference Epstein, Wright, Paluch, Leddy, Hawk, Jaroni, Saad, Crystal-Mansour, Shields and Lerman 110 ), but remains in its infancy. A number of common genetic variants with links to obesity have been identified(Reference Saunders, Chiodini, Sham, Lewis, Abkevich, Adeyemo and de Andrade 111 Reference Herbert 115 ), and some of their mechanisms of action may be appetitive. Robust associations with weight have been demonstrated for the FTO gene (a gene on human chromosome 16) in children and adults(Reference Frayling, Timpson and Weedon 114 ), Children and adults who are carry two copies of the high risk allele are 3 kg heavier than non-carriers, and represent about 16 % of the population, making FTO the first common obesity gene. Mounting evidence suggests that FTO exerts its effects in part through appetite control(Reference Gerken, Girard and Tung 116 Reference Speakman, Rance and Johnstone 118 ), and a recent study by the authors provides further support, finding that FTO is highly associated with satiety responsiveness and food-cue responsiveness in children(Reference Wardle, Carnell, Haworth, Farooqi, O'Rahilly and Plomin 119 ). Further gene association studies using well-defined phenotypic measures may help to reveal the role of other obesity-associated genes in appetite.

A behavioural susceptibility theory of obesity

The evidence that has been outlined is consistent with a behavioural susceptibility model of obesity in which individuals' appetitive traits influence risk of weight gain in the obesogenic environment. This model may be thought of as a modernised expanded version of Schachter's externality theory(Reference Schachter 23 ), which was the first to suggest that obese individuals differ on appetitive traits. The difference is that behavioural susceptibility is conceived as a continuum explaining variation across the continuum of weight.

Fig. 3 illustrates the proposed model. All things being equal, individual factors such as appetitive traits and traits affecting physical activity (e.g. activity preferences) will influence eating behaviour and therefore energy intake, energy balance and body weight. The development of these traits will depend on both nature (genetics) and nurture (parent feeding and other early influences). Broad environmental factors are also assumed to exert a direct effect. In addition, individual and environmental factors will interact to influence weight. For example, heightened food-cue responsiveness will be expressed to a greater extent with more cues present in the environment, while large portion sizes may inspire greater intake in individuals with low satiety responsiveness. Individual and environmental factors could also directly influence each other. For example, an individual who finds food rewarding and prefers energy-dense foods may seek out environments with high availability and affordability of palatable energy-dense foods, whereas long-term exposure to large portions could decrease satiety responsiveness by expanding gastric capacity and changing consumption norms.

Fig. 3. Behavioural susceptibility theory of obesity.

Conclusions and implications

Evidence has been presented that suggests that satiety responsiveness, food-cue responsiveness, the reinforcing value of food and preferences for energy-dense foods are associated with adiposity even at an early age, and that both genetic and environmental influences, including parental feeding style, may contribute to the development of these traits. Prospective studies combining anthropometric, behavioural, biological and genetic measures are needed to establish whether appetitive traits influence food intake and body weight, reveal biological mechanisms and understand the inter-relationships between constructs.

If weight-related appetitive traits can be identified early in life, targeted behavioural or biological interventions that can either alter traits or ameliorate their impact on weight become plausible. For example, if research into the biological roots of satiety responsiveness reveals hormonal differences between individuals, it may become possible to regulate appetite through pharmaceutical means, although the multi-faceted nature of appetite may oppose a ‘quick fix’. Interventions at the behavioural level may be more immediately useful, and one study using a doll model to increase attention to internal satiety cues has successfully improved intake regulation in preschool children(Reference Johnson 120 ), while teaching regulation of eating rate using computerised feedback to allow activation of satiety signals also holds some promise(Reference Bergh, Sabin, Shield, Hellers, Zandian, Palmberg, Olofsson, Lindberg, Bjornstrom, Sodersten and Blass 121 ). Even if appetitive traits turn out to be immutable, environmental changes could enable ‘damage limitation’. For example, managed portion sizes, an emphasis on low-energy-density foods and conscious control of eating rate may be of help.

Heightened food-cue responsiveness may require different approaches. The principles of behaviour therapy suggest that limiting exposure to palatable food cues should be useful, so highly-responsive adults may benefit from keeping tempting foods out of sight, out of reach or out of the home, and parents could also help cue-responsive children in this way. Adults and children who prefer energy-dense foods could try substituting a number of their favourites with palatable low-energy versions. Parents, siblings and peers may also be able to influence children's liking of fruits and vegetables via exposure and modelling(Reference Cooke, Wardle and Gibson 122 , Reference Cooke, Wardle, Gibson, Sapochnik, Sheiham and Lawson 123 ), and early preferences may persist, making healthy choices easier in adulthood.

If the relative reward value of food is high, it may help to consciously seek other activities providing similar reinforcement. Parents could pay greater attention to the alternatives they offer their child. For example, an obese child may eat their favourite snack in preference to most forms of physical activity, but offering the choice of a less-favoured snack and a well-liked activity may yield a more-desirable outcome. Research into the hormonal and neurological correlates of food reward may also suggest new pharmaceutical targets, although the intimate connection between food reward and other kinds of reward may make the search for drugs with specific actions challenging.

Aside from the possibility of targeted intervention, the mere knowledge that eating patterns are partly driven by genetically-influenced traits may be of clinical value. Internalisation of anti-fat attitudes causes distress in many overweight individuals(Reference Puhl and Brownell 124 ), and although it has been suggested that this response is vital for initiating weight loss, negative emotions often make dieting more difficult by promoting unrealistic aspirations and diet–binge cycling(Reference Puhl, Moss-Racusin and Schwartz 125 , Reference Teixeira, Palmeira, Branco, Martins, Minderico, Barata, Silva and Sardinha 126 ). Parents of overweight children may also feel victimised by a mainstream media keen to apportion blame, and the knowledge that it is harder for some children to maintain a healthy weight could provide relief from unhelpful anxiety. Providing information on genetic behavioural risk could encourage individuals to believe that weight is predetermined and immutable, but complementing feedback with education on how to work with and around their or their child's genetic endowment may guard against this possibility.

Finally, a common misconception about genetic explanations is that they argue against the importance of environmental influences. In fact, without certain permissive environmental conditions many genes could not be expressed. Irrespective of individual dispositions, changing the wider environment to make it easier to limit energy intake and expend energy through physical activity is likely to benefit everyone. Environmental changes have the potential to reduce the obesity epidemic not only by protecting individuals burdened with the strongest trait obesity risk, but also by lowering overall population weight and preventing many normal-weight individuals from crossing the threshold for weight-related health complications. A fuller understanding of the interaction between genetic and environmental influences on appetite and body weight could therefore be useful not only for children, parents, adults and clinicians, but also at the level of community and government.

Acknowledgements

This paper is based on the symposium presentation by S.C. but has been subsequently updated to reflect relevant recent publications. S. C. was supported by an Economic and Social Research Council/Medical Research Council inter-disciplinary postdoctoral fellowship and J. W. is funded by Cancer Research UK. The work described was funded by grants from the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, Cancer Research UK, the Economic and Social Research Council and the Medical Research Council. S. C. wrote the first draft of the manuscript and both authors contributed to subsequent drafts.

Neither author has any conflicts of interest to declare.

Many thanks are due to colleagues at the Health Behaviour Research Centre and collaborators at the Social, Developmental and Genetic Psychiatry Centre, particularly Claire Haworth and Robert Plomin for their expertise in quantitative genetics. We are also very grateful to the Nutrition Society for the opportunity to present our thoughts on this topic.

References

1. Ogden, CL, Carroll, MD, Curtin, LR, McDowell, MA, Tabak, CJ & Flegal, KM (2006) Prevalence of overweight and obesity in the United States, 1999–2004. JAMA 295, 15491555.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Wang, Y & Lobstein, T (2006) Worldwide trends in childhood overweight and obesity. Int J Paediatr Obes 1, 1125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Hill, JO, Wyatt, HR, Reed, GW & Peters, JC (2003) Obesity and the environment: where do we go from here? Science 299, 853855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Jeffery, RW & Utter, J (2003) The changing environment and population obesity in the United States. Obes Res 11, Suppl., 12S22S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Romon, M, Duhamel, A, Collinet, N & Weill, J (2005) Influence of social class on time trends in BMI distribution in 5-year-old French children from 1989 to 1999. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 29, 5459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.  Jolliffe, D (2004) Extent of overweight among US children and adolescents from 1971 to 2000. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 28, 49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Wardle, J & Boniface, D (2008) Changes in the distributions of body mass index and waist circumference in the adult population of England, 1993/1994 to 2002/2003. Int J Obes (Lond) 32, 527532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Stunkard, AJ & Fox, S (1971) The relationship of gastric motility and hunger. A summary of the evidence. Psychosom Med 33, 123134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Schachter, S, Goldman, R & Gordon, A (1968) Effects of fear, food deprivation, and obesity on eating. J Pers Soc Psychol 10, 9197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Meyer, JE & Pudel, V (1972) Experimental studies on food-intake in obese and normal weight subjects. J Psychosom Res 16, 305308.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Stunkard, A & Kaplan, D (1977) Eating in public places: a review of reports of the direct observation of eating behavior. Int J Obes (Lond) 1, 89101.Google ScholarPubMed
12. Jansen, A, Theunissen, N, Slechten, K, Nederkoorn, C, Boon, B, Mulkens, S & Roefs, A (2003) Overweight children overeat after exposure to food cues. Eat Behav 4, 197209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Haworth, CMA, Plomin, R, Carnell, S & Wardle, J (2008) Childhood obesity: genetic and environmental overlap with normal-range BMI. Obesity (Silver Spring) doi:10.1038/oby.2008.240 (Epublication ahead of print version).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Johnson, SL & Birch, LL (1994) Parents' and children's adiposity and eating style. Pediatrics 94, 653661.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Faith, MS, Keller, KL, Johnson, SL, Pietrobelli, A, Matz, PE, Must, S, Jorge, MA, Cooperberg, J, Heymsfield, SB & Allison, DB (2004) Familial aggregation of energy intake in children. Am J Clin Nutr 79, 844850.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16. Cecil, JE, Palmer, CN, Wrieden, W, Murrie, I, Bolton-Smith, C, Watt, P, Wallis, DJ & Hetherington, MM (2005) Energy intakes of children after preloads: adjustment, not compensation. Am J Clin Nutr 82, 302308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Otsuka, R, Tamakoshi, K, Yatsuya, H et al. (2006) Eating fast leads to obesity: findings based on self-administered questionnaires among middle-aged Japanese men and women. J Epidemiol 16, 117124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18. Sasaki, S, Katagiri, A, Tsuji, T, Shimoda, T & Amano, K (2003) Self-reported rate of eating correlates with body mass index in 18-y-old Japanese women. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 27, 14051410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. Drabman, RS, Cordua, GD, Hammer, D, Jarvie, GJ & Horton, W (1979) Developmental trends in eating rates of normal and overweight preschool children. Child Dev 50, 211216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20. Barkeling, B, Ekman, S & Rossner, S (1992) Eating behaviour in obese and normal weight 11-year-old children. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 16, 355360.Google ScholarPubMed
21. Lindgren, AC, Barkeling, B, Hagg, A, Ritzen, EM, Marcus, C & Rossner, S (2000) Eating behavior in Prader-Willi syndrome, normal weight, and obese control groups. J Pediatr 137, 5055.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22. Laessle, RG, Uhl, H & Lindel, B (2001) Parental influences on eating behavior in obese and nonobese preadolescents. Int J Eat Disord 30, 447453.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.  Schachter, S (1968) Obesity and eating. Internal and external cues differentially affect the eating behavior of obese and normal subjects. Science 161, 751756.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24. Epstein, LH, Paluch, R & Coleman, KJ (1996) Differences in salivation to repeated food cues in obese and nonobese women. Psychosom Med 58, 160164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25. Huda, MS, Wilding, JP & Pinkney, JH (2006) Gut peptides and the regulation of appetite. Obes Rev 7, 163182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26. Tataranni, PA & Delparigi, A (2003) Functional neuroimaging: a new generation of human brain studies in obesity research. Obes Rev 4, 229238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27. Delparigi, A, Pannacciulli, N, Le, DN & Tataranni, PA (2005) In pursuit of neural risk factors for weight gain in humans. Neurobiol Aging 26, Suppl. 1, 5055.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28. Delparigi, A, Chen, K, Salbe, AD, Reiman, EM & Tataranni, PA (2005) Sensory experience of food and obesity: a positron emission tomography study of the brain regions affected by tasting a liquid meal after a prolonged fast. Neuroimage 24, 436443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29. Birch, LL, Fisher, JO & Davison, KK (2003) Learning to overeat: maternal use of restrictive feeding practices promotes girls' eating in the absence of hunger. Am J Clin Nutr 78, 215220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30. Birch, LL & Fisher, JO (2000) Mothers' child-feeding practices influence daughters' eating and weight. Am J Clin Nutr 71, 10541061.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
31. Fisher, JO, Cai, G, Jaramillo, SJ, Cole, SA, Comuzzie, AG & Butte, NF (2007) Heritability of hyperphagic eating behavior and appetite-related hormones among Hispanic children. Obesity (Silver Spring) 15, 14841495.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
32. Faith, MS, Berkowitz, RI, Stallings, VA, Kerns, J, Storey, M & Stunkard, AJ (2006) Eating in the absence of hunger: a genetic marker for childhood obesity in prepubertal boys? Obesity (Silver Spring) 14, 131138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. Hill, C, Saxton, J, Webber, L, Purslow, L & Wardle, J (2008) Eating without hunger and obesity in 7–9 year olds. Int J Obes (Lond) (In the Press).Google Scholar
34. Davidson, MC, Thomas, KM & Casey, BJ (2003) Imaging the developing brain with fMRI. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev 9, 161167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
35. Holsen, LM, Zarcone, JR, Thompson, TI, Brooks, WM, Anderson, MF, Ahluwalia, JS, Nollen, NL & Savage, CR (2005) Neural mechanisms underlying food motivation in children and adolescents. Neuroimage 27, 669676.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36. Epstein, LH, Leddy, JJ, Temple, JL & Faith, MS (2007) Food reinforcement and eating: a multilevel analysis. Psychol Bull 133, 884906.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
37. Saelens, B & Epstein, LH (1996) Reinforcing value of food in obese and non-obese women. Appetite 27, 4150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38. Temple, JL, Giacomelli, AM, Roemmich, JN & Epstein, LH (2007) Overweight children habituate slower than non-overweight children to food. Physiol Behav 91, 250254.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
39. Davis, C, Strachan, S & Berkson, M (2004) Sensitivity to reward: implications for overeating and overweight. Appetite 42, 131138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40. Epstein, LH & Leddy, JJ (2006) Food reinforcement. Appetite 46, 2225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
41. Wang, GJ, Volkow, ND, Thanos, PK & Fowler, JS (2004) Similarity between obesity and drug addiction as assessed by neurofunctional imaging: a concept review. J Addict Dis 23, 3953.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
42. Nederkoorn, C, Braet, C, Van Eijs, Y, Tanghe, A & Jansen, A (2006) Why obese children cannot resist food: the role of impulsivity. Eat Behav 7, 315322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
43. Rolls, BJ, Drewnowski, A & Ledikwe, JH (2005) Changing the energy density of the diet as a strategy for weight management. J Am Diet Assoc 105, Suppl. 1, S98S103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
44. Ledikwe, JH, Blanck, HM, Kettel, Khan L, Serdula, MK, Seymour, JD, Tohill, BC & Rolls, BJ (2006) Dietary energy density is associated with energy intake and weight status in US adults. Am J Clin Nutr 83, 13621368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
45. Newby, PK, Muller, D, Hallfrisch, J, Qiao, N, Andres, R & Tucker, KL (2003) Dietary patterns and changes in body mass index and waist circumference in adults. Am J Clin Nutr 77, 14171425.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
46. Quatromoni, PA, Copenhafer, DL, D'Agostino, RB & Millen, BE (2002) Dietary patterns predict the development of overweight in women: The Framingham Nutrition Studies. J Am Diet Assoc 102, 12391246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47. Levine, AS, Kotz, CM & Gosnell, BA (2003) Sugars and fats: the neurobiology of preference. J Nutr 133, 831S834S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
48. Berridge, KC & Robinson, TE (2003) Parsing reward. Trends Neurosci 26, 507513.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
49. Wardle, J, Guthrie, C, Sanderson, S, Birch, L & Plomin, R (2001) Food and activity preferences in children of lean and obese parents. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 25, 971977.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
50. Van Strien, T, Frijters, JER, Bergers, GPA & Defares, PB (1986) The Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire (DEBQ) for assessment of restrained, emotional, and external eating behavior. Int J Eat Disord 5, 295315.3.0.CO;2-T>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
51. Stunkard, AJ & Messick, S (1985) The three-factor eating questionnaire to measure dietary restraint, disinhibition and hunger. J Psychosom Res 29, 7183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
52. Shunk, JA & Birch, LL (2004) Validity of dietary restraint among 5- to 9-year old girls. Appetite 42, 241247.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
53. Snoek, HM, Van Strien, T, Janssens, JM & Engels, RC (2007) Emotional, external, restrained eating and overweight in Dutch adolescents. Scand J Psychol 48, 2332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
54. Lluch, A, Herbeth, B, Mejean, L & Siest, G (2000) Dietary intakes, eating style and overweight in the Stanislas Family Study. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 24, 14931499.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
55. Braet, C & Van Strien, T (1997) Assessment of emotional, externally induced and restrained eating behaviour in nine to twelve-year-old obese and non-obese children. Behav Res Ther 35, 863873.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
56. Caccialanza, R, Nicholls, D, Cena, H, Maccarini, L, Rezzani, C, Antonioli, L, Dieli, S & Roggi, C (2004) Validation of the Dutch Eating Behaviour Questionnaire parent version (DEBQ-P) in the Italian population: a screening tool to detect differences in eating behaviour among obese, overweight and normal-weight preadolescents. Eur J Clin Nutr 58, 12171222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
57. Wardle, J, Guthrie, CA, Sanderson, S & Rapoport, (2001) Development of the Children's Eating Behaviour Questionnaire. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 42, 963970.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
58. Carnell, S & Wardle, J (2007) Measuring behavioural susceptibility to obesity: validation of the child eating behaviour questionnaire. Appetite 48, 104113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
59. Ashcroft, J, Semmler, C, Carnell, S, Van Jaarsveld, CHM & Wardle, J (2007) Continuity and stability of eating behaviour traits in children. Eur J Clin Nutr doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602855 (Epublication ahead of print version).Google ScholarPubMed
60. Carnell, S & Wardle, J (2008) Appetite and adiposity: A behavioral susceptibility theory of obesity. Am J Clin Nutr 88, 2229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
61. Viana, V, Sinde, S & Saxton, JC (2008) Children's Eating Behaviour Questionnaire: associations with BMI in Portuguese children. Br J Nutr doi:10.1017/S0007114508894391 (Epublication ahead of print version).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
62. Stunkard, AJ, Berkowitz, RI, Stallings, VA & Schoeller, DA (1999) Energy intake, not energy output, is a determinant of body size in infants. Am J Clin Nutr 69, 524530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
63. Roth, CL, Enriori, PJ, Harz, K, Woelfle, J, Cowley, MA & Reinehr, T (2005) Peptide YY is a regulator of energy homeostasis in obese children before and after weight loss. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 90, 63866391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
64. Savage, JS, Fisher, JO & Birch, LL (2007) Parental influence on eating behavior: conception to adolescence. J Law Med Ethics 35, 2234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
65. Faith, MS, Scanlon, KS, Birch, LL, Francis, LA & Sherry, B (2004) Parent-child feeding strategies and their relationships to child eating and weight status. Obes Res 12, 17111722.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
66. Drucker, RR, Hammer, LD, Agras, WS & Bryson, S (1999) Can mothers influence their child's eating behavior? J Dev Behav Pediatr 20, 8892.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
67. Fisher, JO & Birch, LL (1999) Restricting access to palatable foods affects children's behavioral response, food selection, and intake. Am J Clin Nutr 69, 12641272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
68. Jansen, E, Mulkens, S & Jansen, A (2007) Do not eat the red food!: prohibition of snacks leads to their relatively higher consumption in children. Appetite 49, 572577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
69. Fisher, JO & Birch, LL (1999) Restricting access to foods and children's eating. Appetite 32, 405419.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
70. Fisher, JO & Birch, LL (2002) Eating in the absence of hunger and overweight in girls from 5 to 7 y of age. Am J Clin Nutr 76, 226231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
71. Birch, LL, Zimmerman, SI & Hind, H (1980) The influence of social-affective context on the formation of children's food preferences. Child Dev 51, 856861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
72. Birch, LL, Marlin, DW & Rotter, J (1984) Eating as the ‘means’ activity in a contingency: Effects of young children's food preference. Child Dev 55, 431439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
73. Newman, J & Taylor, A (1992) Effect of a means-end contingency on young children's food preferences. J Exp Child Psychol 53, 200216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
74. Carper, JL, Orlet, FJ & Birch, LL (2000) Young girls' emerging dietary restraint and disinhibition are related to parental control in child feeding. Appetite 35, 121129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
75. Van Strien, T & Bazelier, FG (2007) Perceived parental control of food intake is related to external, restrained and emotional eating in 7–12 year-old boys and girls. Appetite 49, 618625.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
76. Puhl, R & Schwartz, M (2003) If you are good you can have a cookie: How memories of childhood food rules link to adult eating behaviours. Eat Behav 4, 283293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
77. Brunstrom, JM, Mitchell, GL & Baguley, TS (2005) Potential early-life predictors of dietary behaviour in adulthood: a retrospective study. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 29, 463474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
78. Hughes, SO, Power, TG, Orlet, FJ, Mueller, S & Nicklas, TA (2005) Revisiting a neglected construct: parenting styles in a child-feeding context. Appetite 44, 8392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
79. Patrick, H, Nicklas, TA, Hughes, SO & Morales, M (2005) The benefits of authoritative feeding style: caregiver feeding styles and children's food consumption patterns. Appetite 44, 243249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
80. Ogden, J, Reynolds, R & Smith, A (2006) Expanding the concept of parental control: a role for overt and covert control in children's snacking behaviour? Appetite 47, 100106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
81. Musher-Eizenman, D & Holub, S (2007) Comprehensive Feeding Practices Questionnaire: validation of a new measure of parental feeding practices. J Pediatr Psychol 32, 960972.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
82. Plomin, R, DeFries, JC, McClearn, GE & McGuffin, P (2001) Behavioral Genetics, 4th ed. New York: Worth Publishers.Google Scholar
83. Vickers, MH, Krechowec, SO & Breier, BH (2007) Is later obesity programmed in utero? Curr Drug Targets 8, 923934.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
84. Wells, JC, Chomtho, S & Fewtrell, MS (2007) Programming of body composition by early growth and nutrition. Proc Nutr Soc 66, 423434.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
85. Owen, CG, Martin, RM, Whincup, PH, Davey-Smith, G, Gillman, MW & Cook, DG (2005) The effect of breastfeeding on mean body mass index throughout life: a quantitative review of published and unpublished observational evidence. Am J Clin Nutr 82, 12981307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
86. Vickers, MH, Breier, BH, Cutfield, WS, Hofman, PL & Gluckman, PD (2000) Fetal origins of hyperphagia, obesity, and hypertension and postnatal amplification by hypercaloric nutrition. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 279, E83E87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
87. Gillman, MW, Rifas-Shiman, SL, Camargo, CA Jr, Berkey, CS, Frazier, AL, Rockett, HR, Field, AE & Colditz, GA (2001) Risk of overweight among adolescents who were breastfed as infants. JAMA 285, 24612467.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
88. Hales, CN & Barker, DJ (2001) The thrifty phenotype hypothesis. Br Med Bull 60, 520.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
89. Waterland, RA & Jirtle, RL (2003) Transposable elements: targets for early nutritional effects on epigenetic gene regulation. Mol Cell Biol 23, 52935300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
90.  Satter, EM (1986) The feeding relationship. J Am Diet Assoc 86, 352356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
91. Moore, SN, Tapper, K & Murphy, S (2007) Feeding strategies used by mothers of 3–5 year-old children. Appetite 49, 704707.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
92. Renfrew, MJ, Lang, S, Martin, L & Woolridge, MW (2000) Feeding schedules in hospitals for newborn infants. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2000, issue 2, CD000090. Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
93. Plomin, R, Asbury, K & Dunn, J (2001) Why are children in the same family so different? Nonshared environment a decade later. Can J Psychiatry 46, 225233.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
94.  de Castro, JM (2002) Independence of heritable influences on the food intake of free-living humans. Nutrition 18, 1116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
95.  de Castro, JM (2006) Heredity influences the dietary energy density of free-living humans. Physiol Behav 87, 192198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
96.  de Castro, JM (1999) Heritability of hunger relationships with food intake in free-living humans. Physiol Behav 67, 249258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
97. Neale, BM, Mazzeo, SE & Bulik, CM (2003) A twin study of dietary restraint, disinhibition and hunger: an examination of the eating inventory (three factor eating questionnaire). Twin Res 6, 471478.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
98. de Castro, JM & Lilenfeld, LR (2005) Influence of heredity on dietary restraint, disinhibition, and perceived hunger in humans. Nutrition 21, 446455.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
99. Tholin, S, Rasmussen, F, Tynelius, P & Karlsson, J (2005) Genetic and environmental influences on eating behavior: the Swedish Young Male Twins Study. Am J Clin Nutr 81, 564569.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
100. Wardle, J, Carnell, S, Haworth, CMA & Plomin, R (2008) Evidence for strong genetic influence on childhood obesity despite the force of the obesogenic environment. Am J Clin Nutr 87, 398404.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
101. Maes, HH, Neale, MC & Eaves, LJ (1997) Genetic and environmental factors in relative body weight and human adiposity. Behav Genet 27, 325351.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
102. Koeppen-Schomerus, G, Wardle, J & Plomin, R (2001) A genetic analysis of weight and overweight in 4-year-old twin pairs. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 25, 838844.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
103. Carnell, S, Haworth, CMA, Van Jaarsveld, CMH, Plomin, R & Wardle, J (2008) Genetic influence on appetite in children. Int J Obes (London) ( In the Press).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
104. Breen, FM, Plomin, R & Wardle, J (2006) Heritability of food preferences in young children. Physiol Behav 88, 443447.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
105. Steinle, NI, Hsueh, WC, Snitker, S, Pollin, TI, Sakul, H, St Jean, PL, Bell, CJ, Mitchell, BD & Shuldiner, AR (2002) Eating behavior in the Old Order Amish: heritability analysis and a genome-wide linkage analysis. Am J Clin Nutr 75, 10981106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
106. Collaku, A, Rankinen, T, Rice, T, Leon, AS, Rao, DC, Skinner, JS, Wilmore, JH & Bouchard, C (2004) A genome-wide linkage scan for dietary energy and nutrient intakes: the Health, Risk Factors, Exercise Training, and Genetics (HERITAGE) Family Study. Am J Clin Nutr 79, 881886.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
107. Cai, G, Cole, SA, Bastarrachea, RA, MacCluer, JW, Blangero, J & Comuzzie, AG (2004) Quantitative trait locus determining dietary macronutrient intakes is located on human chromosome 2p22. Am J Clin Nutr 80, 14101414.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
108. Aubert, R, Betoulle, D, Herbeth, B, Siest, G & Fumeron, F (2000) 5-HT2A receptor gene polymorphism is associated with food and alcohol intake in obese people. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 24, 920924.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
109. Herbeth, B, Aubry, E, Fumeron, F, Aubert, R, Cailotto, F, Siest, G & Visvikis-Siest, S (2005) Polymorphism of the 5-HT2A receptor gene and food intakes in children and adolescents: the Stanislas Family Study. Am J Clin Nutr 82, 467470.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
110. Epstein, LH, Wright, SM, Paluch, RA, Leddy, JJ, Hawk, LW Jr, Jaroni, JL, Saad, FG, Crystal-Mansour, S, Shields, PG & Lerman, C (2004) Relation between food reinforcement and dopamine genotypes and its effect on food intake in smokers. Am J Clin Nutr 80, 8288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
111. Saunders, CL, Chiodini, BL, Sham, P, Lewis, CM, Abkevich, V, Adeyemo, AA & de Andrade, M (2007) Meta-analysis of genome-wide linkage studies in BMI and obesity. Obesity (Silver Spring) 15, 22632275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
112. Yang, W, Kelly, T & He, J (2007) Genetic epidemiology of obesity. Epidemiol Rev 29, 4961.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
113. Rankinen, T, Zuberi, A, Chagnon, YC, Weisnagel, SJ, Argyropoulos, G, Walts, B, Perusse, L & Bouchard, C (2006) The human obesity gene map: the 2005 update. Obesity (Silver Spring) 14, 529644.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
114. Frayling, TM, Timpson, NJ, Weedon, MN et al. (2007) A common variant in the FTO gene is associated with body mass index and predisposes to childhood and adult obesity. Science 316, 889894.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
115.  Herbert, A (2006) A common genetic variant is associated with adult and childhood obesity. Science 312, 279283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
116. Gerken, T, Girard, CA, Tung, YC et al. (2007) The obesity-associated FTO gene encodes a 2-oxoglutarate-dependent nucleic acid demethylase. Science 318, 14691472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
117. Stratigopoulos, G, Padilla, S, Leduc, CA, Watson, E, Hattersley, AT, McCarthy, MI, Zeltser, LM, Chung, WK & Leibel, RL (2008) Regulation of Fto/Ftm gene expression in mice and humans. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 294, R11851196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
118. Speakman, JR, Rance, KA & Johnstone, AM (2008) Polymorphisms of the FTO gene are associated with variation in energy intake, but not energy expenditure. Obesity (Silver Spring). doi:10.1038/oby.2008.318 (Epublication ahead of print version).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
119. Wardle, J, Carnell, S, Haworth, CMA, Farooqi, IS, O'Rahilly, S & Plomin, R (2008) Obesity-associated genetic variation in FTO is associated with diminished satiety. J Clin Endocrinol Metab doi:10.1210/jc.2008-0472 (Epublication ahead of print version).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
120.  Johnson, SL (2000) Improving preschoolers' self-regulation of energy intake. Pediatrics 106, 14291435.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
121. Bergh, C, Sabin, M, Shield, J, Hellers, G, Zandian, M, Palmberg, K, Olofsson, B, Lindberg, K, Bjornstrom, M & Sodersten, P (2008) A framework for the treatment of obesity: early support. In Obesity: Causes, Mechanisms and Prevention [ Blass, EM editor]. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates Inc. (In the Press).Google Scholar
122. Cooke, L, Wardle, J & Gibson, EL (2003) Relationship between parental report of food neophobia and everyday food consumption in 2–6 year-old children. Appetite 41, 205206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
123. Cooke, LJ, Wardle, J, Gibson, EL, Sapochnik, M, Sheiham, A & Lawson, M (2004) Demographic, familial and trait predictors of fruit and vegetable consumption by pre-school children. Public Health Nutr 7, 295302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
124. Puhl, R & Brownell, KD (2001) Bias, discrimination, and obesity. Obes Res 9, 788805.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
125. Puhl, RM, Moss-Racusin, CA & Schwartz, MB (2007) Internalization of weight bias: Implications for binge eating and emotional well-being. Obesity (Silver Spring) 15, 1923.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
126. Teixeira, PJ, Palmeira, AL, Branco, TL, Martins, SS, Minderico, CS, Barata, JT, Silva, AM & Sardinha, LB (2004) Who will lose weight? A reexamination of predictors of weight loss in women. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 1, 12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
127. McCarthy, HD, Jarrett, KV & Crawley, HF (2001) The development of waist circumference percentiles in British children aged 5·0–16·9 y. Eur J Clin Nutr 55, 902907.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
128. Birch, LL, Fisher, JO, Grimm-Thomas, K, Markey, CN, Sawyer, R & Johnson, SL (2001) Confirmatory factor analysis of the Child Feeding Questionnaire: a measure of parental attitudes, beliefs and practices about child feeding and obesity proneness. Appetite 36, 201210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Child eating-behaviour questionnaire satiety responsiveness scores (a) and enjoyment of food scores (b) by waist circumference group for an 8–11-year-old twin sample drawn from the Twins Early Development Study. Waist sd scores were based on UK 1990 reference data(127) and used to derive centile scores: thin normal group, 0th–50th centile; mid normal group, 51st–90th; high group, 91st–97th; very-high group, 98th–100th. Values are means and 95% CI represented by vertical bars. (From Carnell & Wardle(60).)

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Child eating-behaviour questionnaire food responsiveness scores by parental restriction group (a) and satiety responsiveness scores by parental pressure-to-eat group (b) for a 9–11-year-old twin sample drawn from the Twins Early Development Study. Parental feeding groups were created by dividing scores on the restriction and pressure-to-eat scales from the child feeding questionnaire(128) into quartiles, with 1st group representing the lowest quartile and 4th group the highest quartile. Values are means and 95% CI represented by vertical bars.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Behavioural susceptibility theory of obesity.