From: What can food-image tasks teach us about anorexia nervosa? A systematic review
Domain | Subdomain | Study | Paradigm & Outcome Variable(s) | Participants (AN subtype) | Mean age (SD) | Mean BMI (SD) | Non-food images presented | Meal-Task Interval Standardised | Summary of Findings | Quality Index Score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Neuropsychology: Attention | Distraction | Dickson et al., 2008 [19] | Working memory task. Effects of image presentation on reaction time and accuracy. | 24 AN (R) | 30.6 (9.0) | 16.0 (1.0) | Yes | No | No differences AN vs HC | 6 |
24 HC | 33.1 (8.0) | 21.9 (2.0) | ||||||||
Brooks et al., 2012 [20] | Working memory and inhibitory control task. Effects of image presentation on reaction time and accuracy. | 13 AN (R) | 25 (11.0) | 15 (1.54) | Yes | Yes | Distraction during working memory task: AN > HC Distraction during inhibitory control task: AN < HC | 7 | ||
20 HC | 22 (5.0) | 22.38 (2.66) | ||||||||
Neimeijer et al., 2017 [18] | Visual target detection task. Effects of image presentation on accuracy. | 66 AN (57.5% R, 42.5% EDNOS AN-R) | 15.25 (1.86) | 15.45 (1.79) | Yes | No | Distraction AN > HC | 6 | ||
55 HC | 16.14 (1.9) | 20.45 (2.10) | ||||||||
Recognition | Nikendei et al., 2008 [62] | Participants view images. Recognition and recall. | 16 AN (81.25% R, 18.75% BP) | 22.8 (U) | 14.8 (2.3) | Yes | No | No differences AN vs HC | 9 | |
16 HC, fasted | 23.6 (U) | U | ||||||||
16 HC, sated | 23.1 (U) | U | ||||||||
Visual probe detection | Veenstra & de Jong 2012 [24] | Exogenous cueing task: participants detect targets that appear in one of two on-screen locations; distractor image (food or neutral stimuli) precedes target onset, appearing in either the same (valid trials) or opposite (invalid trials) location as the target. Response time. | 88 AN (61.3% R, 28.7% EDNOS AN-R) | 15.02 (1.37) | 15.69 (1.90) | Yes | No | No differences AN vs HC | 6 | |
76 HC | 15.12 (1.75) | 20.42 (2.37) | ||||||||
Cardi et al., 2012 [28] | Dot-probe task: Participants instructed to detect targets appearing in one of two on-screen locations, either replacing a food or neutral image that are presented concurrently. Response time. | 18 AN (33% R, 11% BP, 55% EDNOS-AN) | 31.5 (11.4) | 17 (2.6) | Yes | No | No effect of intervention on attentional bias towards food | 5 | ||
19 HC | 28.6 (8.0) | 23.9 (2.8) | ||||||||
Cardi et al., 2013 [27] | 38 AN (21% EDNOS) | 29.9 (7.92) | 16.2 (2.35) | Yes | No | Attentional bias towards food inpatients: pre-meal < post-meal Attentional bias towards food outpatients: pre-meal > post-meal | 6 | |||
Kim et al., 2014 [23] | 31 AN | 23.1 (9.35) | 15.15 (2.51) | Yes | Yes | No differences AN vs HC | 7 | |||
33 HC | 22.18 (2.14) | 20.91 (2.22) | ||||||||
Cardi et al., 2015 [29] | 19 AN | 31.0 (10.0) | 16.7 (2.7) | Yes | Yes | No differences AN vs HC | 7 | |||
23 BN | 24.4 (5.7) | 23.4 (6.9) | ||||||||
36 HC | 25.9 (5.0) | 21.5 (2.0) | ||||||||
Leppenan et al., 2017 [26] | 30 AN | 26.2 (6.82) | 16.3 (2.04) | Yes | Yes | Attentional bias away from food: AN > HC | 8 | |||
29 HC | 26.83 (8.54) | 23.25 (3.65) | ||||||||
Eye-tracking | Giel et al., 2011 [32] | Eye movements recorded while participants view pairs consisting of a food and neutral image. Number and duration of fixations on images. | 19 AN (73.6% R, 26.4% BP) | 24.4 (4.1) | 15.8 (1.8) | Yes | Yes | Attentional bias towards food: AN < HC | 7 | |
20 HC, sated | 24.2 (2.9) | 21.3 (1.7) | ||||||||
18 HC, fasted | 24.4 (2.6) | 21.6 (1.5) | ||||||||
Neuropsychology: Reward | Explicit rating | Bossert et al., 1991 [53] | Participants view images. Palatability ratings. | 9 AN (R) | 21.9 (2.9) | 66.1(8.5) IBW | No | No | Palatability high calorie food: AN < HC Palatability low calorie food: AN > HC | 8 |
20 BN | 21.7 (2.9) | 101.9 (12.9) IBW | ||||||||
9 HC | 22.3 (1.2) | 100.8 (4.8) IBW | ||||||||
Jiang et al., 2010 [46] | Participants view images. Liking and wanting ratings. | 17 AN (R) | 26.47 (7.12) | 15.04 (1.93) | Yes | Yes | Liking: AN < HC Wanting: AN < HC | 6 | ||
29 HC | 24.52 (5.58) | 20.38 (1.87) | ||||||||
Krizbai et al., 2016 [52] | Participants view images. Valence, dominance, arousal ratings. | 14 AN (R) | 15.07 (1.38) | 16.92 (1.73) | No | No | Positive valence: AN < HC | 5 | ||
14 HC | 15.14 (1.29) | 20.51 (2.50) | ||||||||
Implicit rating | Cowdrey et al., 2013 [41] | Binary forced choice procedure: across multiple trials participants choose between two foods, each of which may be high or low calorie and sweet or savoury. Relative response time to select high and low-calorie foods (implicit wanting). | 20 AN (80% R, 20% BP) | 26.4 (10.56) | 16.33 (1.1) | No | No | Explicit wanting high calorie food: AN < HC; AN-WR < HC Implicit wanting high calorie food: AN < HC; AN < AN-rec; AN-WR < HC Implicit wanting low calorie food: AN > HC; AN > AN-rec; AN-WR > HC | 4 | |
22 AN-WR (82% R, 18% BP) | 25.1 (6.03) | 21.05 (1.89) | ||||||||
22 AN-rec (82% R, 18% BP) | 23.73 (5.76) | 21.03 (1.53) | ||||||||
41 HC | 24.29 (6.46) | 21.7 (1.88) | ||||||||
Approach-Avoidance | Spring & Bulik, 2014 [51] | Affect misattribution procedure: participants briefly view food images, which are replaced by Chinese characters. Pleasantness ratings of Chinese characters (implicit liking). | 9 AN | 21.4 (5.79) | U | Yes | No | Implicit liking: AN < HC | 6 | |
14 AN-rec | ||||||||||
29 HC | ||||||||||
Veenstra & de Jong, 2011 [54] | Manikin Task: participants move manikin towards or away from images presented on-screen depending on orientation of image (horizontal or vertical). Errors/reaction times on approach versus avoidance trials (approach bias). | 89 AN (60.7% R, 39.3% EDNOS AN-R) | 14.84 (1.70) | 15.71 (1.87) | Yes | No | Approach bias: AN < HC | 6 | ||
76 HC | 14.86 (1.70) | 20.42 (2.37) | ||||||||
Neimeijer et al., 2015 [56] | 98 AN (64.5% AN, 45.5% EDNOS-AN) | 14.97 (1.63) | U | Yes | No | Approach bias high calorie food: pre-treatment < post-treatment | 8 | |||
Paslaskis et al., 2016 [55] | Approach-avoidance task: participants push or pull computer mouse depending on orientation of on-screen image (horizontal or vertical). Reaction time on approach versus avoidance trials (approach bias). | 41 AN (80.5% R, 19.5% BP) | 26.85 (6.71) | 15.29 (1.6) | No | Yes | Approach bias: AN < HC | 6 | ||
42 HC | 24.79 (2.71) | 21.37 (1.57) | Â | |||||||
Neuropsychology: Perceptual tasks | Size perception | Yellowlees et al., 1988 [57] | Participants view real food item and adjust screen image to match perceived size. Estimated versus actual size of items. | 20 AN | 22.4 (8.0) | U | Yes | No | Size over-estimation: AN > HC | 5 |
20 HC | 22.0 (6.6) | |||||||||
Milos et al., 2013 [58] | Participants view meals of different portion sizes. Estimates of portion size. | 24 AN | 22.38 (4.10) | 15.8 (2.01) | No | Yes | Portion size estimate: AN > HC | 7 | ||
27 HC | 21.41 (2.75) | 21.47 (2.71) | ||||||||
Kissileff et al., 2016 [99] | Participants view meals of different portion sizes. Tolerability and expected anxiety ratings. | 24 AN (87.5% R, 22.5% BP) | 15.46 (1.57) | 17.11 (1.35) | No | No | Portion size tolerability: AN < HC Anticipated anxiety: AN > HC | 7 | ||
10 HC | 14.6 (2.63) | 20.6 (1.35) | ||||||||
Weight-gain estimate | Milos et al., 2017 [100] | Participants view meals of different portion sizes. Estimates of weight-gain as a consequence of eating portions presented. | 24 AN | 22.38 (4.10) | 15.8 (2.01) | No | Yes | Estimation of weight-gain: AN > HC | 7 | |
27 HC | 21.41 (2.75) | 21.47 (2.71) | ||||||||
Neuropsychology: Decision making | Food-choice | Steinglass et al., 2015 [60] | Participants select between food items varying in fat content in a binary forced choice task. Proportion of high fat food items selected. | 22 AN (54.5% R, 45.5% BP) | 29.4 (11.2) | 17.5 (1.9) | No | No | Preference for high-fat food items: AN < HC | 6 |
22 HC | 26.3 (5.8) | 21.0 (1.7) | ||||||||
Neurophysiology: Attention | Electroencephalography | Blechert et al., 2011 [67] | Neural activity recorded with electroencephalography (EEG) while food images viewed. Amplitude of neural response. | 21 AN | 23.2 (4.55) | 16.6 (1.3) | Yes | No | Neuronal activity: AN > HC | 7 |
22 BN | 26.1 (7.5) | 22.6 (3.24) | ||||||||
32 HC | 26.2 (5.02) | 20.7 (2.41) | ||||||||
Nikendei et al., 2012 [69] | 16 AN (81.25% R, 18.25% BP) | 22.8 (5.2) | 14.8 (2.3) | Yes | No | No differences AN vs HC | 8 | |||
16 HC pre-meal | 23.1 (4.8) | 22.3 (2.1) | ||||||||
16 HC post-meal | 23.6 (5.2) | 20.9 (1.7) | ||||||||
Novosel et al., 2014 [68] | 11 AN | 15.36 (1.62) | 15.79 (1.87) | Yes | No | Neuronal activity: AN > HC | 6 | |||
11 HC | Â | 20.42 (1.77) | ||||||||
Magnetoencephalography | Godier et al., 2016 [33] | Neural activity recorded with magnetoencephalography (MEG) while participants think about how much they want to eat presented food images. Amplitude of neural response. | 13 AN (R) | 31.2 (5.3) | 15.7 (1.9) | Yes | Yes | Neuronal activity at 150 ms: AN > HC; AN > AN-rec Neuronal activity at 320 ms: AN < AN-rec | 6 | |
14 AN-rec (R) | 27.1 (6.5) | 20.9 (1.6) | ||||||||
15 HC | 23.7 (5.4) | 21.4 (1.9) | ||||||||
Neurophysiology: Reward | Electromyography | Soussignan et al., 2010 [71] | Participants view food images presented following subliminal presentation of facial expressions. Activity of facial (zygomatic, corrugator) muscles index hedonic response. | 16 AN (R) | 26.68 (7.30) | 14.97 (1.97) | No | Yes | Corrugator activity: AN > HC Zygomatic activity: AN < HC | 7 |
25 HC | 24.6 (6.03) | 20.52 (1.90) | ||||||||
Soussignan et al., 2011 [72] | Participants view food images. Activity of facial (zygomatic, corrugator) muscles index hedonic response. | 17 AN (R) | 26.5 (7.1) | 14.9 (1.9) | Yes | Yes | Corrugator activity: AN > HC | 6 | ||
27 HC | 24.7 (6.1) | 20.4 (1.8) | ||||||||
Hildebrandt et al., 2015 [73] | Participants complete food-based associative learning task. Activity of facial muscles (zygomatic, corrugator, levator labii), index hedonic and disgust responses. | 14 AN/EDNOS-AN (R) | 15.05 (1.87) | 17.52 (2.91) | No | No | Levator labii activity to food cue: AN > HC Zygomatic activity to cue for absence of food: AN > HC | 5 | ||
15 HC | 17.64 (2.71) | 22.49 (2.94) | ||||||||
Friederich et al., 2006 [74] | Acoustic stimulus and food image presented concurrently; activity of oculomotor muscle recorded. Startle response indexes appetitive/aversive motivation. | 13 AN (84.6% R, 25.4% BP) | 25.1 (3.7) | 16.4 (3.7) | Yes | Yes | No differences AN vs HC | 7 | ||
15 BN | 25.2 (5.1) | 23.4 (3.7) | ||||||||
25 HC | 25.0 (3.3) | 21.8 (2.7) | ||||||||
Racine et al., 2016 [76] | 19 AN (36.8% R, 63.2% BP) | 25.11 (9.13) | 16.72 (1.63) | Yes | No | AN unable to suppress startle response to food and negative non-food stimuli | 7 | |||
Erdur et al., 2017 [75] | 33 AN (60.6% R, 39.4% BP) | 28.2 (9.41) | 15.8 (1.90) | Yes | Yes | No differences AN vs AN-rec vs HC | 7 | |||
15 AN-rec (33.3% R, 66.6% BP) | 40.8 (6.79) | 20.81 (1.93) | ||||||||
18 HC | 28.95 (8.25) | 21.82 (1.58) | ||||||||
Neuroimaging | Passive viewing | Nagamitsu et al., 2012 [82] | Participants view images of food stimuli while brain activity measured with functional near infrared spectroscopy. Neural response. | 12 AN (R) | 14.4 (1.3) | 15.5 (2.0) | Yes | No | No differences AN vs HC | 5 |
13 HC | 14.3 (1.3) | 18.7 (1.3) | ||||||||
Ellison et al., 1998 [78] | Participants view images of food stimuli while brain activity measured with fMRI. Neural response. | 6 AN | U | 15 | No | No | Brain activation: AN > HC (insula, anterior cingulate gyrus, amygdala) | 6 | ||
6 HC | U | |||||||||
Santel et al., 2006 [48] | 13 AN (R) | 16.1 (2.0) | 16.0 (1.7) | Yes | Yes | Brain activation pre-meal: AN < HC (lingual gyrus); Brain activation post-meal: AN < HC (Inferior parietal lobule) | 6 | |||
10 HC | 16.8 (2.6) | 20.5 (1.9) | ||||||||
Gizewski et al., 2010 [47] | 12 AN (R) | 27 (U) | 14.1 (1.8) | Yes | Yes | Brain activation pre-meal: AN > HC (midcingulate cortex); AN < HC (ACC) Brain activation post-meal: AN > HC (L insula); HC > AN (prefrontal cortex and R insula) | 6 | |||
10 HC | 25 (U) | 21.4 (1.5) | ||||||||
Joos et al., 2011 [44] | 11 AN (R) | 25.0 (5.0) | 16.2 (1.2) | Yes | No | Brain activation: AN > HC (amygdala); AN < HC (midcingulum) | 6 | |||
11 HC | 26.0 (5.2) | 21.1 (1.8) | ||||||||
Rothemund et al., 2011 [79] | 12 AN (83.4% R, 16.6% BP) | 24 (6.1) | 13.6 (1.2) | Yes | Yes | Brain activation: AN > HC (precuneus) | 5 | |||
12 HC | 26 (3.7) | 21 (1.6) | ||||||||
Holsen et al., 2012 [45] | 12 AN (R) | 21.8 (2.7) | 18.0 (0.8) | Yes | Yes | Brain activation pre-meal: AN < HC (amygdala, hypothalamus, insula, hippocampus, orbitofrontal cortex); AN-WR < HC (hypothalamus, amygdala, insula) Brain activation post-meal: AN < HC (insula, amygdala); AN > AN-WR (amygdala); AN < AN-WR (insula) | 6 | |||
10 AN-WR | 23.4 (2.3) | 22.1 (2.2) | ||||||||
11 HC | 21.6 (1.3) | 22.4 (1.3) | ||||||||
Kim et al., 2012 [84] | 18 AN (33.3% R, 66.6% BP) | 25.2 (4.2) | 16.0 (3.7) | Yes | Yes | Brain activation: AN > HC (Inferior frontal gyrus, anterior cingulate cortex, superior frontal gyrus and cerebellem); AN > BN (anterior cingulate cortex); AN < BN (middle temporal gyrus) | 6 | |||
20 BN | 22.9 (3.9) | 21.6 (2.3) | ||||||||
20 HC | 23.3 (1.8) | 19.9 (1.9) | ||||||||
Boehm et al., 2017 [83] | 35 AN (94.2% R, 5.8% BP) | 16.25 (3.46) | 14.59 (1.5) | Yes | No | Brain activation: AN > HC (superior occipital gyrus) | 7 | |||
25 HC | 16.31 (3.39) | 20.46 (2.06) | ||||||||
Kerr et al., 2017 [80] | 20 AN-WR (R) | 17 (3) | 18 (3) | Yes | No | Brain activation correlates with interoceptive awareness in opposite directions AN vs HC | 5 | |||
20 HC | 19.84 (0.87) | 21.3 (1.55) | ||||||||
Directed food tasks | Uher et al., 2003 [85] | Participants shown images of food while neural activity measured with fMRI; participants instructed to think how hungry images make them feel and whether they would like to eat the food. Neural response. | 8 AN (R) | 25.6 (2.8) | 16.6 (1.2) | Yes | Yes | Brain activation: AN < AN-rec (Apical prefrontal cortex, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, medial paracentral cortex, cerebellem); AN > AN-rec (occipital-lingual gyrus) | 5 | |
9 AN-rec (R) | 26.9 (5.3) | 20.4 (2.1) | ||||||||
9 HC | 26.6 (3.3) | 22.2 (3.8) | ||||||||
Uher et al., 2004 [50] | 16 AN (56.8% R, 43.2% BP) | 26.93 (12.14) | 16.04 (1.64) | Yes | Yes | Brain activation: AN > HC (medial orbitofrontal cortex, lingual gyrus, anterior cingulate); AN < HC (parietal cortex, cerebellem); AN > BN (apical prefrontal cortex, lateral prefrontal cortex, occipital lingual gyrus); AN < BN (cerebellem) | 6 | |||
10 BN | 29.80 (8.80) | 22.43 (2.37) | ||||||||
19 HC | 26.68 (8.34) | 22.41 (2.98) | ||||||||
Brooks et al., 2011 [81] | Participants shown images of food while neural activity measured with fMRI; participants instructed to imagine eating the food. Neural response. | 18 AN (61.1% R, 38.9% BP) | 26.0 (6.8) | U | Yes | Yes | Brain activation: AN > BN (parietal lobe, cingulate cortex); AN < BN (superior temporal gyrus, caudate, supplementary motor area); AN > HC (visual cortex); AN < HC (cerebellem) | 7 | ||
8 BN | 25.0 (7.1) | |||||||||
24 HC | 26.0 (9.5) | |||||||||
Sanders et al., 2015 [49] | 15 AN (60% R, 40% BP) | 25.6 (5) | 14.5 (1.7) | Yes | Yes | Brain activation: AN < HC (superior frontal gyrus); AN > HC (middle frontal gyrus) | 6 | |||
15 AN-rec (66.6% R, 33.3% BP) | 24.3 (5) | 21.1 (1.9) | ||||||||
15 HC | 25.8 (5) | 21.5 (2.3) | ||||||||
Scaife et al., 2016 [43] | Participants shown images of food while neural activity measured with fMRI; participants instructed to think about how much they want to eat the food at the present moment. Neural response. | 12 AN (R) | 29.4 (6) | 15.4 (1.9) | No | Yes | Brain activation: AN < HC (postcentral gyrus, precuneus, superior parietal lobule); AN < HC (frontal pole, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, supramarginal gyrus for low calorie food); AN > HC (frontal pole for high calorie food) | 6 | ||
14 AN-rec (R) | 27 (6.5) | 20.9 (1.6) | ||||||||
16 HC | 24.3 (5.7) | 21.2 (2) | ||||||||
Active choice | Foerde et al., 2015 [61] | Participants select between food items varying in fat content in a binary forced choice task; fMRI measures neural activity. Neural activity during food choice. | 21 AN (47.6% R, 52.4% BP) | 26.1 (6.5) | 21.5 (1.9) | No | Yes | Brain activation: AN > HC (dorsal striatum) | 6 | |
21 HC | 22.7 (3.1) | 15.7 (2.0) |