Skip to main content

Table 4 Importance of eating motives (TEMS)

From: Stress-induced hyperphagia: empirical characterization of stress-overeaters

Eating motivations Total sample
Mean (±sd)
Stress-overeater
Mean (±sd)
Stress-undereaterMean (±sd) Stress-insensitive eater
Mean (±sd)
Mean difference between groups
p-value*
Effect size
η2**
Liking 6.2 (±0.9) 6.2 (±0.9) 6.3 (±0.9) 6.2 (±0.9) 0.30  
Need & hunger 5.5 (±1.2) 5.3 (±1.2) 5.6 (±1.2) 5.6 (±1.1) <0.005 0.013
Health 5.2 (±1.2) 5.2 (±1.2) 5.2 (±1.2) 5.2 (±1.1) 0.97  
Habits 5.1 (±1.3) 5.3 (±1.2) 4.9 (±1.4) 5.1 (±1.3) <0.005 0.016
Pleasure 4.9 (±1.3) 5.1 (±1.3) 4.8 (±1.4) 4.7 (±1.3) <0.005 0.02
Convenience 4.4 (±1.5) 4.5 (±1.5) 4.3 (±1.5) 4.1 (±1.5) 0.01 0.001
Natural concerns 4.3 (±1.8) 4.3 (±1.8) 4.3 (±1.8) 4.3 (±1.8) 0.97  
Sociability 4.3 (±1.6) 4.4 (±1.6) 4.2 (±1.6) 4.1 (±1.7) 0.03 0.004
Weight control 4.0 (±1.7) 4.4 (±1.6) 3.7 (±1.8) 3.5 (±1.7) <0.005 0.035
Traditional eating 3.7 (±1.7) 3.8 (±1.8) 3.6 (±1.7) 3.7 (±1.6) 0.17  
Visual appeal 3.6 (±1.6) 3.8 (±1.6) 3.5 (±1.6) 3.2 (±1.5) <0.005 0.016
Price 3.4 (±1.6) 3.5 (±1.6) 3.3 (±1.5) 3.1 (±1.4) 0.01 0.006
Affect regulations 3.3 (±1.9) 4.4 (±1.7) 2.6 (±1.6) 2.4 (±1.6) <0.005 0.241
Social norms 2.1 (±1.4) 2.3 (±1.5) 2.0 (±1.3) 1.9 (±1.3) <0.005 0.013
Social image 1.9 (±1.2) 2.0 (±1.3) 1.8 (±1.2) 1.6 (±1.2) 0.06  
  1. Effect benchmarks: small (η2=0.02), medium (η2=0.13), large (η2=0.26) [31]
  2. *p-values were calculated applying the Kruskal–Wallis test
  3. ** η2 was only calculated for motives with sign. p-value,