Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 8339462

Hunger.

Abstract

The term 'hunger' has a variety of meanings, and numerous physiological mechanisms underlying the sensation have been proposed. This review delineates the most common uses of the term, examines methods for measuring features of the experience and critically evaluates the evidence supporting its physiological basis. In addition, the association between reported hunger and ingestive behavior in healthy and selected clinical populations is discussed. Hunger is an important psychological and physiological phenomena that exerts a strong influence on behavior. When better characterized, it should be more amenable to monitoring and manipulation for therapeutic purposes.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R D Mattes, M I Friedman. 1993. Hunger.. https://doi.org/10.1159/000171402

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Sensory-specific satiety-related olfactory activation of the human orbitofrontal cortex.

When a food is eaten to satiety, its reward value decreases. This decrease is usually greater for the food eaten to satiety than for other foods, an effect termed sensory-specific satiety. In an fMRI investigation it was shown that for a region of the orbitofrontal cortex the activation produced by the odour of the food eaten to satiety decreased, whereas there was no similar decrease for the odour of a food not eaten in the meal. This effect was shown both by a voxel-wise SPM contrast (p <0.05 corrected) and an ANOVA performed on the mean percentage change in BOLD signal in the identified clusters of voxels (p <0.006). These results show that activation of a region of the human orbitofrontal cortex is related to olfactory sensory-specific satiety.

Eating↗

Demonstrations of the influence of the eating environment on food acceptance.

In two independent demonstrations, pre-prepared food was served in different environments: first, identical prepared meals were served in both a training restaurant and in a student cafeteria; second, a prepared main dish was served in a food science laboratory class, and as part of an entire meal in two student cafeterias and in a training restaurant. In the training restaurants and in the student cafeterias, people selected and paid for their meals. The acceptability ratings of the food served varied across the three different environments in the following order: restaurant>laboratory>cafeteria. Differences in acceptance were attributed to contextual effects and the expectations they produce, actual product differences, and a number of possible covariates. Ratings of sensory attributes tended to mirror the acceptability effects. The difficulty of comparing contexts within actual food service systems is discussed.

Eating↗