Expected Satiety: Application to Weight Management and Understanding Energy Selection in Humans


Recent advances in the approaches used to quantify expectations of satiation and satiety have led to a better understanding of how humans select and consume food, and the associated links to energy intake regulation. When compared calorie for calorie some foods are expected to deliver several times more satiety than others, and multiple studies have demonstrated that people are able to discriminate between similar foods reliably and with considerable sensitivity. These findings have implications for the control of meal size and the design of foods that can be used to lower the energy density of diets. These methods and findings are discussed in terms of their implications for weight management. The current paper also highlights why expected satiety may also play an important role beyond energy selection, in moderating appetite sensations after a meal has been consumed, through memory for recent eating and the selection of foods across future meals.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1


Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. 1.

    Brunstrom JM, Shakeshaft NG, Scott-Samuel NE. Measuring 'expected satiety' in a range of common foods using a method of constant stimuli. Appetite. 2008;51(3):604–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Griffioen-Roose S et al. Effect of replacing sugar with non-caloric sweeteners in beverages on the reward value after repeated exposure. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(11):e81924.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Bolhuis DP, Lakemond CMM, de Wijk RA, Luning PA, de Graaf C. Consumption with large sip sizes increases food intake and leads to underestimation of the amount consumed. Plos One. 2013;8(1):e53288. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0053288.

  4. 4.

    Forde CG et al. Texture and savoury taste influences on food intake in a realistic hot lunch time meal. Appetite. 2013;60:180–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Forde CG et al. Oral processing characteristics of solid savoury meal components, and relationship with food composition, sensory attributes and expected satiation. Appetite. 2013;60(1):208–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Arboleya J-C et al. Effect of highly aerated food on expected satiety. Int J Gastron Food Sci. 2014;2(1):14–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Yeomans MR et al. Effects of repeated consumption on sensory-enhanced satiety. Br J Nutr. 2014;111(6):1137–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Green SM, Blundell JE. Subjective and objective indices of the satiating effect of foods. Can people predict how filling a food will be? Eur J Clin Nutr. 1996;50(12):798–806.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Masic U, Yeomans MR. Does monosodium glutamate interact with macronutrient composition to influence subsequent appetite? Physiol Behav. 2013;116–117:23–9. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2013.03.017.

  10. 10.

    Brogden N, Almiron-Roig E. Food liking, familiarity and expected satiation selectively influence portion size estimation of snacks and caloric beverages in men. Appetite. 2010;55(3):551–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    de Graaf C et al. Beliefs about the satiating effect of bread with spread varying in macronutrient content. Appetite. 1992;18(2):121–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Brunstrom JM, Rogers PJ. How many calories are on our plate? Expected fullness, not liking, determines meal-size selection. Obesity. 2009;17(10):1884–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Brunstrom JM, Shakeshaft NG. Measuring affective (liking) and non-affective (expected satiety) determinants of portion size and food reward. Appetite. 2009;52(1):108–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Hardman CA, McCrickerd K, Brunstrom JM. Children's familiarity with snack foods changes expectations about fullness. Am J Clin Nutr. 2011;94(5):1196–1201.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Wilkinson LL et al. Computer-based assessments of expected satiety predict behavioural measures of portion-size selection and food intake. Appetite. 2012;59(3):933–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.•

    Brunstrom JM. Mind over platter: pre-meal planning and the control of meal size in humans. Int J Obes. 2014;38:S9–12. This review provides a concise overview of the expected satiety method, current knowledge and directions for future research.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Drapeau V et al. Appetite sensations as a marker of overall intake. Br J Nutr. 2005;93(2):273–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Yeomans MR. Rating changes over the course of meals: what do they tell us about motivation to eat? Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2000;24(2):249–59.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Piqueras-Fiszman B, Spence C. The weight of the container influences expected satiety, perceived density, and subsequent expected fullness. Appetite. 2012;58(2):559–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Kral TVE. Effects on hunger and satiety, perceived portion size and pleasantness of taste of varying the portion size of foods: a brief review of selected studies. Appetite. 2006;46(1):103–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Almiron-Roig E et al. Estimating food portions. Influence of unit number, meal type and energy density. Appetite. 2013;71:95–103.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Brogden N. Effects of appetite status and percieved satiation on portion size estimation in men. 2009, University of Chester.

  23. 23.

    Tetley AC, Brunstrom JM, Griffiths PL. The role of sensitivity to reward and impulsivity in food-cue reactivity. Eat Behav. 2010;11(3):138–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Holt SHA et al. A satiety index of common foods. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1995;49(9):675–90.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Holliday A et al. A novel tool to predict food intake: the visual meal creator. Appetite. 2014;79:68–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Rolls ET. Chemosensory learning in the cortex. Front Syst Neurosci. 2011;5:78.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Cassady BA, Considine RV, Mattes RD. Beverage consumption, appetite, and energy intake: what did you expect? Am J Clin Nutr. 2012;95(3):587–93.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Brunstrom JM et al. 'Expected satiety' changes hunger and fullness in the inter-meal interval. Appetite. 2011;56(2):310–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Crum AJ et al. Mind over milkshakes: mindsets, not just nutrients, determine ghrelin response. Health Psychol. 2011;30(4):424–9. discussion 430-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Hogenkamp PS et al. Texture, not flavor, determines expected satiation of dairy products. Appetite. 2011;57(3):635–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Carels RA, Harper J, Konrad K. Qualitative perceptions and caloric estimations of healthy and unhealthy foods by behavioral weight loss participants. Appetite. 2006;46(2):199–206.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Brunstrom JM, Collingwood J, Rogers PJ. Perceived volume, expected satiation, and the energy content of self-selected meals. Appetite. 2010;55(1):25–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Forde CG, et al. Expectations of satiation and satiety are a better predictor of self-selected portion size than liking. In: British feeding and drinking group. 2011. Appetite.

  34. 34.

    Brunstrom JM, Shakeshaft NG, Alexander E. Familiarity changes expectations about fullness. Appetite. 2010;54(3):587–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Irvine MA et al. Increased familiarity with eating a food to fullness underlies increased expected satiety. Appetite. 2013;61:13–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Fay SH et al. What determines real-world meal size? Evidence for pre-meal planning. Appetite. 2011;56(2):284–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Wansink B, Johnson KA. The clean plate club: about 92% of self-served food is eaten. Int J Obes. 2014.

  38. 38.

    Hinton EC et al. Using photography in 'The Restaurant of the Future'. A useful way to assess portion selection and plate cleaning? Appetite. 2013;63:31–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Yeomans MR. Palatability and the micro-structure of feeding in humans: the appetizer effect. Appetite. 1996;27(2):119–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    De Graaf C, De Jong LS, Lambers AC. Palatability affects satiation but not satiety. Physiol Behav. 1999;66(4):681–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Ferriday D, et al. Exploring relationships between expected satiation, eating topography and actual satiety across a range of meals. In: British feeding and drinking group. 2013, Appetite. p. 474.

  42. 42.

    McCrickerd K, Chambers L, Yeomans MR. Does modifying the thick texture and creamy flavour of a drink change portion size selection and intake? Appetite. 2014;73:114–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    McCrickerd K et al. Subtle changes in the flavour and texture of a drink enhance expectations of satiety. Flavour Sci Recent Dev. 2012;1(20):1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Hogenkamp PS. The effect of sensory-nutrient congruency on food intake after repeated exposure: do texture and/or energy density matter? Physiol Behav. 2014. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.03.025.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Yeomans MR, Chambers L. Satiety-relevant sensory qualities enhance the satiating effects of mixed carbohydrate-protein preloads. Am J Clin Nutr. 2011;94(6):1410–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Chambers L, Ells H, Yeomans MR. Can the satiating power of a high energy beverage be improved by manipulating sensory characteristics and label information? Food Qual Prefer. 2013;28(1):271–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Fay SH et al. Product labelling can confer sustained increases in expected and actual satiety. Appetite. 2011;57(2):557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Brunstrom JM, et al. Episodic memory and appetite regulation in humans. Plos One, 2012; 7(12)

  49. 49.

    Morewedge CK, Huh YE, Vosgerau J. Thought for food: imagined consumption reduces actual consumption. Science. 2010;330(6010):1530–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Higgs S, Williamson AC, Attwood AS. Recall of recent lunch and its effect on subsequent snack intake. Physiol Behav. 2008;94(3):454–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Robinson E, Blissett J, Higgs S. Changing memory of food enjoyment to increase food liking, choice and intake. Br J Nutr. 2012;108(8):1505–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    O'Sullivan HL et al. Effects of repeated exposure on liking for a reduced-energy-dense food. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;91(6):1584–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Morell P et al. Hydrocolloids for enhancing satiety: relating oral digestion to rheology, structure and sensory perception. Food Hydrocoll. 2014;41:343–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Tarrega A et al. Hydrocolloids as a tool for modulating the expected satiety of milk-based snacks. Food Hydrocoll. 2014;39:51–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Oldham-Cooper RE, Hardman CA, Brunstrom JM. Changing ‘mode of presentation’ to increase the expected satiety of large portions. Directions for future research. Appetite. 2013;71:483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Kissileff HR et al. Portion size perception and anxiety response to food cues in anorexia nervosa. Appetite. 2011;57(2):535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Sclafani A, Ackroff K. The relationship between food reward and satiation revisited. Physiol Behav. 2004;82(1):89–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Pérez C, Sclafani A. Cholecystokinin conditions flavor preferences in rats. Am J Physiol. 1991;260(1):R179–85.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    de Araujo IE. Multiple Reward Layers in Food Reinforcement. In: Neurobiology of Sensation and Reward. Boca Raton: CRC; 2011. p. 263–85.

    Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Lee RB. What hunters do for a living, or, how to make out on scarce resources. In: Lee RB, DeVore I, editors. Man the hunter. Piscataway: Aldine Transaction; 1968. p. 30–48.

    Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Davidson TL, Swithers SE. A Pavlovian approach to the problem of obesity. Int J Obes. 2004;28(7):933–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Spetter MS et al. Taste matters – effects of bypassing oral stimulation on hormone and appetite responses. Physiol Behav. 2014;137:9–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Cecil JE, Francis J, Read NW. Relative contributions of intestinal, gastric, oro-sensory influences and information to changes in appetite induced by the same liquid meal. Appetite. 1998;31:377–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Brunstrom JM, Mitchell GL. Effects of distraction on the development of satiety. Br J Nutr. 2006;96(4):761–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Bellisle F, Dalix AM. Cognitive restraint can be offset by distraction, leading to increased meal intake in women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001;74(2):197–200.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    Booth DA. Conditioned satiety in the rat. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1972;81(3):457–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. 67.

    Davis JD, Smith GP. The conditioned satiating effect of orosensory stimuli. Physiol Behav. 2009;97(3–4):293–303.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. 68.

    Warwick ZS, Bowen KJ, Synowski SJ. Learned suppression of intake based on anticipated calories: cross-nutrient comparisons. Physiol Behav. 1997;62(6):1319–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    van Dongen MV et al. Taste–nutrient relationships in commonly consumed foods. Br J Nutr. 2012;108(01):140–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Graham L, Murty G, Bowrey DJ. Taste, smell and appetite change after roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery. Obes Surg. 2014;24(9):1463–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. 71.

    Halmi KA et al. Appetitive behavior after gastric bypass for obesity. Int J Obes. 1981;5(5):457–64.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. 72.

    Melissas J et al. Sleeve gastrectomy - a restrictive procedure? Obes Surg. 2007;17(1):57–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. 73.

    Boakes RA, Patterson AE, Kwok DWS. Flavor avoidance learning based on missing calories but not on palatability reduction. Learn Behav. 2012;40(4):542–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references


Jeff Brunstrom’s research is supported by the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013 under Grant Agreement 607310 [Nudge-it]) and by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC, grant references BB/I012370/1 and BB/J00562/1).

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Ciarán G. Forde, Eva Almiron-Roig, and Jeffrey M. Brunstrom declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ciarán G. Forde.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Psychological Issues

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Forde, C.G., Almiron-Roig, E. & Brunstrom, J.M. Expected Satiety: Application to Weight Management and Understanding Energy Selection in Humans. Curr Obes Rep 4, 131–140 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13679-015-0144-0

Download citation


  • Expected satiety
  • Portion selection
  • Food intake