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,