Prior research has utilised person-centred approaches to identify parent feeding profiles distinguished by controlling and structure-based practices, but less research has examined autonomy support-based practices, or how social and family contextual factors differ between feeding profiles. This study aimed to identify profiles of parents with similar patterns of feeding practices and to examine whether profiles differ on family contextual factors. In 2022, 989 UK parents of children aged 3-6 years (M=4.1 years) completed an online survey, which included the Comprehensive Feeding Practices Questionnaire (CFPQ), measuring parental feeding practices, and validated questionnaires capturing family contextual variables. Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) was conducted to identify parent feeding profiles using the CFPQ. A MANCOVA assessed differences in family contextual variables between profiles. LPA identified three profiles based on common model fit indices and theoretical considerations. Profile 1 'moderate control' (25.2%) showed moderate use of controlling practices and low use of structure-based and autonomy support-based practices. Profile 2 'structured and supportive' (29.6%) showed low use of controlling practices and high use of structure-based and autonomy support-based practices. Profile 3 'using everything' (45.2%) showed high use of all three types of feeding practices. Parents in the 'moderate control' profile had significantly lower parental wellbeing and reported more barriers of time and energy for meal planning compared to other profiles. In contrast, parents in the 'structured and supportive' profile had significantly lower household chaos and lower parental stress. Mothers had a higher proportion of membership to the 'structured and supportive' profile (33.9%) compared to other profiles, whereas fathers had a higher membership proportion to the 'using everything' profile (60.9%). Future interventions should be tailored to parent feeding practice profiles and associated family contextual factors.

Dual front-of-pack (FoP) labelling (i.e., presence of both nutrition and sustainability labels) can guide consumers towards healthier and more sustainable food choices. Despite growing interest, evidence on behavioural outcomes remains limited. This study aimed to review existing literature to understand the effects of dual FoP labelling on consumer behaviour. We searched seven databases for experimental studies published until May 2024 that assessed dual front-of-pack labels as interventions. Eligible studies measured the following outcomes: objective understanding, purchase intention, food choice, and/or willingness to pay (WTP). Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool. Seven studies examined five nutrition and five sustainability labels, with three reporting on purchase intention, three on food choice, and one on WTP. None of the studies assessed objective understanding. Risk of bias assessment rated five studies as high quality, one moderate, and one low. Five studies testing congruent dual labelling (positive nutrition & sustainability scores) using interpretive formats (e.g., warning labels, Nutri-Score, Eco-Score) reported favourable effects of dual labelling. Two studies assessing congruent text-based or certification labels showed unfavourable outcomes. Incongruent labelling (positive nutrition & negative sustainability, and vice versa) produced mixed results, suggesting conflicting information may confuse consumers. Understanding how consumers respond to combined nutrition and sustainability information is essential for transitioning to healthy and sustainable food systems. This review shows that dual labelling can influence choices, but its effectiveness depends on label format and message framing, highlighting the need for careful design to avoid unintended effects and support informed decision-making.

Some individuals consume food before or after exercise to compensate for energy expended. If this behaviour is prevalent, it could have implications for population-level health. We estimated the prevalence of eating in response to exercise (before and after exercise) and explored associated factors using an online questionnaire. A nationally representative sample of UK adults engaging in weekly exercise (N=1054) reported how their eating behaviours (portion size, frequency, perceived healthiness) change on exercise days compared to non-exercise days. Other measures included demographics (e.g., sex, dieting status), exercise characteristics (frequency, intensity, duration, mode), exercise motivation and enjoyment, the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (dietary restraint and disinhibition), and the Diet-Related Beliefs of Exercisers Scale (DBES) (sub-scales: food as reward, nutritional replenishment, healthy eating and refrain from eating). Associations with eating in response to exercise were examined using multiple logistic regression. Eating in response to exercise was reported by 24% (n=251) of the sample, and occurred most often after exercise (17%, n=178). The DBES food as reward sub-scale (OR=2.26, 95% CI 1.91, 2.67) and the DBES nutritional replenishment sub-scale (OR=1.42, 95% 1.13, 1.79) were strongly and positively associated with eating in response to exercise. Internal motivation for exercise (OR=1.53, 95% CI 1.21, 1.93), strength training (OR=1.74, 95% CI 1.28, 2.36), and disinhibition (OR=1.12, 95% CI 1.07, 1.17) were also positively associated with eating in response to exercise. We conclude that nearly a quarter of regular exercisers report consuming more food on exercise days and that reducing this behaviour has the potential to improve population-level health.

Embodiment techniques implicitly influence behavior. Summarized within the Sword-and-Shield-hypothesis, hand movements and contractions can affect approach and avoidance motivation. Thus, they could offer a way to influence food craving as a motivational approach tendency. Two experimental studies (N=121; N=63) tested whether an implicit modulation of right (approach) and left (avoidance) motor activity (via squeezing a relaxation ball) influences food cue-induced food craving in right-handed women. Study 1 showed that left motor activity (avoidance) lead to less induced food craving compared to a group with right motor activity (approach). There was a significant interaction effect (F(1, 119)=6.66, p=.011, ηp2=.053), showing a trend towards suppressed food craving in the group with left motor activity compared to the group with right motor activity. Study 2, with an improved experimental design, also showed less induced food craving in the group with left motor activity (avoidance) compared to right and to no motor activity (F(3.40, 102.09)=3.15, p=.023, ηp2=.095). These results indicate that avoidance-related embodiment effects according to the Sword-and-Shield-Hypothesis may implicitly influence cue-induced food craving and that particularly left motor activity can buffer food craving in right-handed women as a potentially helpful application for everyday use. However, applicability in field settings and among people with disturbed eating behaviors are areas for future research.

The food environment provides an abundance of energy-dense packaged food, some specifically designed to attract children. The appeal of these energy-dense child-targeted foods can have health implications. Some children may be more susceptible to their appeal due to temperamental differences, namely their levels of impulsivity and inhibitory control. This study aimed to determine whether the temperamental dimensions of impulsivity and inhibitory control were associated with children's preferences for packaged food. Five hundred fourteen primary school children (5-12 years) recruited from a science museum participated in a discrete choice experiment to determine their preferred packaging attributes, an implicit association test to assess their attitudes toward packaging, and anthropometric measurements. Primary caregivers completed either the Child Behavior Questionnaire or the Temperament in Middle Childhood Questionnaire to assess impulsivity and inhibitory control in their children. T-tests and multiple regression analyses were utilised for the study. Four key results were found: (a) children preferred the food packaging attributes that reflected healthiness, and (b) they perceived the child-targeted packaging to be healthier compared with plain packaging. However, (c) older children (aged 9-12 years) with higher levels of impulsivity were less discriminating with the packaging design than did children with lower levels, and (d) there was no effect of inhibitory control on children's preferences. Future research should investigate how food manufacturers and policymakers can design food packaging to support children in making healthier choices from packaged foods, particularly those with higher levels of impulsivity.