Dietary changes and its psychosocial moderators during the university examination period
- 274 Downloads
Stress is thought to stimulate unhealthy dietary choices towards fat and sweet foods. Nevertheless, individual vulnerabilities might exist depending on psychological factors. We wanted to check dietary change during examination stress via a longitudinal study, while identifying risk groups via moderation by eating behavior (emotional/external/restrained), food choice motive, taste preference, reward/punishment sensitivity, impulsivity, coping strategies, sedentary behavior, social support, living in a student home and being a first-year student.
Before and after the examination period January 2017, 232 Flemish students completed online questionnaires on diet (food frequency questionnaire with diet quality index), the above mentioned psychological factors, perceived exam stress and some demographics.
During the examination period, diet quality decreased: lower general diet quality index, lower fruit and vegetables intake, higher fast food intake and more difficulties to eat healthy. Based on significant time moderation, emotional eaters, external eaters, sweet/fat lovers, those with health as food choice motive, sensitive to reward or punishment, highly sedentary, non-first-year students and those with high stress reports were at higher risk for exam-induced diet deteriorations (partial η2: 017–0.071; highest effects for health as food choice motive and external eating). Most tested variables were also related to baseline dietary intake which was of rather low quality.
The overall stress-diet hypothesis was confirmed as students were vulnerable to diet deterioration during examination periods and high-risk groups were identified. Prevention strategies should integrate psychological and lifestyle aspects: stress management, nutritional education with techniques for self-effectiveness, awareness of eating-without-hunger and a health stimulating environment.
KeywordsStress Students Moderation Snack Diet quality Emotional eating
No funding was received for this study. Nathalie Michels is funded by FWO (Research Foundation-Flanders).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 2.Gatineau M, Dent M (2011) Obesity and mental health. National Obesity Observatory, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- 7.Epel E, Tomiyama AJ, Dallman MF (2012) Stress and reward neural networks, eating, and obesity. In: Brownell K, Gold M (eds) Handbook of food and addiction. p 462Google Scholar
- 9.Scientific Institute of Public health (2015) health interview survey: reports. https://his.wiv-isp.be/SitePages/Reports.aspx
- 23.Stok FM, Renner B, Clarys P, Lien N, Lakerveld J, Deliens T (2018) Understanding eating behavior during the transition from adolescence to young adulthood: a literature review and perspective on future research directions. Nutrients. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10060667 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 24.Huybrechts I, De Backer G, De Bacquer D, Maes L, De Henauw S (2009) Relative validity and reproducibility of a food-frequency questionnaire for estimating food intakes among flemish preschoolers. Int J Environ Res Public Health 6(1):382–399. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph6010382 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 25.VIGeZ (2006) De actieve voedingsdriehoek: een praktische voedings- en beweeggids (The active Food Pyramid: A practical guide to diet and physical activity). Vlaams Instituut voor Gezondheidspromotie en Ziektepreventie (VIGeZ), BrusselsGoogle Scholar
- 26.Huybrechts I, Vereecken C, De Bacquer D, Vandevijvere S, Van Oyen H, Maes L, Vanhauwaert E, Temme L, De Backer G, De Henauw S (2010) Reproducibility and validity of a diet quality index for children assessed using a FFQ. Brit J Nutr 104(1):135–144. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114510000231 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 32.Zimet GD, Powell SS, Farley GK, Werkman S, Berkoff KA (1990) Psychometric characteristics of the multidimensional scale of perceived social support. J Pers Assess 55(3–4):610–617. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5503&%23x0026;4_17 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 33.Aiken LS, West S (1991) Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Sage, Newbury ParkGoogle Scholar
- 35.Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
- 49.Shannon C, Story M, Fulkerson JA, French SA (2002) Factors in the school cafeteria influencing food choices by high school students. J School Health 72(6):229–234. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2002.tb07335.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 66.Delfino LD, Silva DAD, Tebar WR, Zanuto EF, Codogno JS, Fernandes RA, Christofaro DG (2018) Screen time by different devices in adolescents: association with physical inactivity domains and eating habits. J Sport Med Phys Fit 58(3):318–325. https://doi.org/10.23736/S0022-4707.17.06980-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 78.Becker JB, Berkley KJ, Geary N, Hampson E, Herman JP, Young EA (2008) Sex differences in the brain: from genes to behavior. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar