Stress and other negative emotions, such as depression and anxiety, can lead to both decreased and increased food intake. The term ‘emotional eating’ has been widely used to refer to the latter response: a tendency to eat in response to negative emotions with the chosen foods being primarily energy-dense and palatable ones. Emotional eating can be caused by various mechanisms, such as using eating to cope with negative emotions or confusing internal states of hunger and satiety with physiological changes related to emotions. An increasing number of prospective studies have shown that emotional eating predicts subsequent weight gain in adults. This review discusses particularly three lines of research on emotional eating and obesity in adults. First, studies implying that emotional eating may be one behavioural mechanism linking depression and development of obesity. Secondly, studies highlighting the relevance of night sleep duration by showing that adults with a combination of shorter sleep and higher emotional eating may be especially vulnerable to weight gain. Thirdly, an emerging literature suggesting that genes may influence body weight partly through emotional eating and other eating behaviour dimensions. The review concludes by discussing what kind of implications these three avenues of research offer for obesity prevention and treatment interventions.

New dietary-based concepts are needed for treatment and effective prevention of overweight and obesity. The primary objective was to investigate if reduction in appetite is associated with improved weight loss maintenance. This cohort study was nested within the European Commission project Satiety Innovation (SATIN). Participants achieving ≥8% weight loss during an initial 8-week low-energy formula diet were included in a 12-week randomised double-blind parallel weight loss maintenance intervention. The intervention included food products designed to reduce appetite or matching controls along with instructions to follow national dietary guidelines. Appetite was assessed by ad libitum energy intake and self-reported appetite evaluations using visual analogue scales during standardised appetite probe days. These were evaluated at the first day of the maintenance period compared with baseline (acute effects after a single exposure of intervention products) and post-maintenance compared with baseline (sustained effects after repeated exposures of intervention products) regardless of randomisation. A total of 181 participants (forty-seven men and 134 women) completed the study. Sustained reduction in 24-h energy intake was associated with improved weight loss maintenance (R 0·37; P = 0·001), whereas the association was not found acutely (P = 0·91). Suppression in self-reported appetite was associated with improved weight loss maintenance both acutely (R −0·32; P = 0·033) and sustained (R −0·33; P = 0·042). Reduction in appetite seems to be associated with improved body weight management, making appetite-reducing food products an interesting strategy for dietary-based concepts.

A low-energy diet (LED) is an effective approach to induce a rapid weight loss in individuals with overweight. However, reported disproportionally large losses of fat-free mass (FFM) after an LED trigger the question of adequate protein content. Additionally, not all individuals have the same degree of weight loss success. After an 8-week LED providing 5020 kJ/d for men and 4184 kJ/d for women (84/70 g protein/d) among overweight and obese adults, we aimed to investigate the relationship between protein intake relative to initial FFM and proportion of weight lost as FFM as well as the individual characteristics associated with weight loss success. We assessed all outcomes baseline and after the LED. A total of 286 participants (sixty-four men and 222 women) initiated the LED of which 82 % completed and 70 % achieved a substantial weight loss (defined as ≥8 %). Protein intake in the range 1·0–1·6 g protein/d per kg FFM at baseline for men and 1·1–2·2 g protein/d per kg FFM at baseline for women was not associated with loss of FFM (P = 0·632). Higher Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ) hunger at baseline and reductions in TFEQ disinhibition and hunger during the LED were associated with larger weight loss (all P ≤ 0·020); whereas lower sleep quality at baseline predicted less successful weight loss using intention to treat analysis (P = 0·021), possibly driven by those dropping out (n 81, P = 0·067 v. completers: n 198, P = 0·659). Thus, the protein intakes relative to initial FFM were sufficient for maintenance of FFM and specific eating behaviour characteristics were associated with weight loss success.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a non-restrictive satiating diet in men displaying various degrees of satiety efficiency. In all, sixty-nine obese men aged 41·5 (sd 5·7) years were randomly assigned to a control (10–15, 55–60 and 30 % energy as protein, carbohydrate and lipid, respectively; n 34) or satiating (20–25, 45–50 and 30–35 % energy as protein, carbohydrate and lipid, respectively; n 35) diet for 16 weeks, and were classified as having a low (LSP) or high (HSP) satiety phenotype. Both diets were consumed ad libitum. Changes in body weight, BMI, percent fat mass, waist circumference, satiety responsiveness and eating behaviour traits were assessed following the intervention. Dropout rates were higher in the control diet (44·1 %) compared with the satiating diet (8·6 %). Decreases in body weight, BMI and waist circumference were significant in both groups, yet HSP individuals lost more body weight than LSP individuals (P=0·048). Decreases in % fat mass were greater in the satiating diet (LSP: −2·1 (sd 2·1) %; P<0·01 and HSP: −3·0 (sd 2·5) %; P<0·001) compared with the control diet (LSP: −1·1 (sd 2·5) % and HSP: −1·3 (sd 2·6) %) (P=0·034). Satiety responsiveness was markedly improved in the satiating diet, whereas no significant changes were observed in the control group. Changes in dietary restraint (+3·3 (sd 2·9) to +7·2 (sd 5·5)), flexible control (+0·9 (sd 1·4) to +2·3 (sd 2·7)), rigid control (+2·2 (sd 1·5) to +2·5 (sd 2·8)), disinhibition (−2·8 (sd 3·7) to −3·2 (sd 2·6)) and susceptibility to hunger (−2·7 (sd 4·1) to −4·6 (sd 3·9)) were similar between the diets. Compared with the control diet, the satiating diet favoured adherence, decreased % fat mass and improved satiety responsiveness in both HSP and LSP individuals.

Eating behaviour traits of rigid control and disinhibition have been associated with body weight in both adults and adolescents. Moreover, adults reporting a dieting history have increased levels of unhealthy eating behaviours. Against this background, the present study aimed to examine the relationship between dieting history and eating behaviour traits in adolescents. For the purpose of this research, a total of sixty adolescents (aged 15 (sem 2·4) years) from the Québec Family Study completed the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ) and a questionnaire regarding eating habits. Self-reported current and past dieting were analysed against eating behaviour traits measured by the TFEQ, including all subscales. As the results revealed, few adolescents reported currently dieting (n 3). Adolescents who reported a dieting history (23·3 %) were older (16·9 v. 14·4 years, P < 0·001), were more likely to be female (78·6 v. 41·3 %, P < 0·05) but did not have a significantly higher BMI z-score (1·5 v. 0·9, P = 0·10), although they were more likely to be either overweight or obese (P < 0·01). After correcting for sex, BMI and age, adolescents who reported a dieting history had higher levels of rigid control and disinhibition (P < 0·05–0·0001) than those reporting no dieting history. A greater proportion of adolescents characterised by high rigid control and high disinhibition were past dieters, compared to those characterised by low levels of both behaviour traits (53 v. 4 %). The study arrived at the following conclusions: as observed in adults, adolescents with a history of dieting present unfavourable eating behaviour traits. These behavioural traits may represent an additional challenge to the long-term regulation of body weight.

The aim of the present study was to test the hypothesis that a prolonged refeeding duration after successful very-low-energy diet (VLED)-induced weight loss beneficially affects weight development and eating behaviour. Patients (n 269) were recruited to a 1-year obesity treatment programme with 12 weeks of an initial VLED. After the VLED, patients with ≥ 10 % weight loss were randomly allocated to 1 week (group 1) or 6 weeks (group 6) refeeding to an ordinary, energy-reduced diet, and thereafter followed and actively treated for an additional 40 weeks. Eating behaviour (revised twenty-one-item Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire) was measured at baseline, during and after refeeding, and at week 52. Weight change over time in the two treatment groups was tested by repeated-measures analysis in completers and by intention to treat (ITT). Of the patients, 169 (109 women) lost ≥ 10 % during the VLED and were randomised. At randomisation, weight loss was − 16·5 (sd 3·7) % in group 1 and − 16·7 (sd 4·3) % in group 6 (P = 0·73). Between weeks 12 and 52, completers in group 6 regained significantly less weight (3·9 (sd 9·1) %) as compared with group 1 (8·2 (sd 8·3) %; P = 0·006) (ITT, P = 0·05). Completers in group 6 also maintained a higher level of dietary restraint after refeeding was completed, but eating behaviour did not differ at week 52. Weight change after the refeeding periods were completed did not differ significantly between the groups (P = 0·06). Overall, longer refeeding duration after successful weight loss with a VLED improves weight maintenance in a 1-year perspective.

Associations between eating behaviours and dietary variables have not been thoroughly investigated in healthy postmenopausal women in a real-life uncontrolled context. To investigate how eating behaviours (cognitive dietary restraint, disinhibition and susceptibility to hunger) were associated with food and drink consumption, energy density and meal pattern in 112 healthy postmenopausal women (age 56·8 (sd 4·4) years) not on hormonal therapy. Women completed a 3 d weighed food record and filled out the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire. The sample was divided according to the median of the distribution of cognitive dietary restraint and disinhibition (9 and 6 respectively). Both subgroups of women with high restraint level (presenting either high or low disinhibition) consumed a diet with a lower energy density than subgroups of women with lower restraint level. Women with high restraint–low disinhibition had a lower consumption of red meat and processed meat and a lower consumption of diet soft drinks than women with low restraint–high disinhibition. They were also characterised by a higher intake of whole grains than women with high restraint–high disinhibition and than women with lower restraint level (with either high or low disinhibition). Women with high restraint–high disinhibition levels showed differences in dietary variables when compared with subgroups of women with lower restraint level, namely for refined grains and diet soft drinks. We conclude that in healthy postmenopausal women, dietary consumption of specific food and drink may be related to particular eating behaviours. Women with high restraint and low disinhibition levels generally showed the most healthy dietary pattern.

The purpose of the present cross-sectional study was to compare eating behaviours (cognitive dietary restraint, disinhibition and susceptibility to hunger), dietary profile and physiological variables according to the practice of dieting: current dieting; history of dieting in the 10-year period that preceded the study; no dieting during the same period. Dieting history, anthropometric markers of adiposity, RMR, dietary profile (3 d food record) and eating behaviours (three-factor eating questionnaire) were determined in a sample of 244 men and 352 women. A greater proportion of women (31·8 %) than men (16·8 %) reported that they had been on a diet over the past 10 years (P=0·0001). In both genders, current and past dieters had a higher BMI (P<0·05) than non-dieters and current dieters had lower reported energy intakes than past dieters and non-dieters (only in women) (P<0·05). Current and past dieters also had higher scores for all eating behaviours and their subscales (P<0·05; except for susceptibility to hunger in men) compared with non-dieters (adjusted for age, reported energy intake, percentage of dietary fat, BMI and RMR). Moreover, for each dieting-history category, women had significantly higher scores for cognitive dietary restraint than men (P<0·05). In conclusion, the present study showed that current and past dieters had higher scores for cognitive dietary restraint and disinhibition compared with non-dieters. As disinhibition has previously been associated with a greater risk of subsequent weight gain, interventions aimed at preventing an increase in disinhibition may be promising for long-term weight maintenance.