Table 4 The impact of SR (exploratory analysis) [ηp2 effect sizes from regression analysis shown in square brackets].

From: The impact of insufficient sleep on dietary choices and physical activity behaviors: evidence from a randomized cross-over trial

 

Auction bids

ASA24 outcomes

Comparison group

SR increases bid premium for taste over health for:

SR increases bid for Kcal for:

SR increases daily Kcal for:

SR increases daily fat for:

SR increases dailysugar for:

Female vs. male

Males (drinks)

p < .05 [0.006]

–

–

–

–

BMI ≥ 30 vs.

BMI < 30

–

–

Non-obese

p < .01 [0.011]

Non-obese

p < .05 [0.007]

Non-obese

p < .10 [0.006]

High vs. low cognitive reflection

–

–

High CRT

p < .05 [0.007]

High CRT

p < .01 [0.023]

High CRT

p < .10 [0.005]

High vs. low cognitive restraint

–

–

–

–

–

High vs. low emotional eater

Low Emotion

(snacks)

p < .05 [0.008]

–

High Emotion

p < .10 [0.001]

–

–

High vs. low controlled eater

–

–

Controlled Eaters

p < .05 [0.007]

Controlled Eaters

p < .01 [0.017]

Controlled Eaters

p < .10 [0.004]

Hunger/thirst ≥ 3 vs. hunger/thirst < 3

Hungry

(snacks)

p < .05 [0.005]

–

NA

NA

NA

Fasted vs. ate/drank within last 3 h

–

–

NA

NA

NA

  1. p-value range and effect sizes in square brackets are shown (exact p-values are less informative given they are a function of the exact set of bootstrapped regressions used. Partial eta-squared effect sizes are from comparable OLS regressions. For Cognitive Reflection, Cognitive Restraint, Controlled Eater, and Emotional eaters, a median split is used to create the high and low group comparisons. For the Auction bids, estimations using subjective Tastiness and Healthiness difference between snacks and drinks always resulted in a main effect where the Tastiness difference was a significantly stronger (and positive) predictor of one’s auction bids than the Healthiness difference—in some instances the estimated coefficient was also not significantly different from zero for the Healthiness difference. For estimations using the objective Kcal difference, a significant main effect where bids were higher for higher calorie items was only found in some drink, but not snack, auctions. All results reported are based on the bootstrap approach described in the main text, but with n = 100 repetitions of the bootstrap procedure for these exploratory analyses. The full results supporting for the summary table above are in the Appendix (Tables A11-A19).
Back to article page