Short Communication | Published:

The clean plate club: about 92% of self-served food is eaten

International Journal of Obesity volume 39, pages 371374 (2015) | Download Citation

Abstract

Many eating studies in psychology, consumer behavior and marketing journals are dismissed, because they focus on how much one serves and not how much is eaten. We develop a means of estimating the percentage of self-served food that is consumed under various conditions. An aggregate analysis was conducted of studies where participants served themselves food and where actual intake was measured. Analyses explored what percentage of food was consumed depending on population, food and situational cues and generally showed that adults consistently consume the vast majority (91.7%) of what they serve themselves. This was higher for meals (92.8%) than for snacks (76.1%) and higher when a person was not distracted (97.1%) than when he or she was distracted (88.8%). The percentage eaten did not vary between lab (90.7%) and field settings (91.9%). Because many eating behavior studies outside of nutrition measure food selection, but not intake, the aggregate estimates presented in this research can enable obesity, nutrition and public health researchers to extrapolate how much may have been eaten in such studies. Doing so will extend their relevance to better understanding eating behavior and better developing solutions to overeating.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    United States Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General. The Surgeon General’s Call to Action to Prevent and Decrease Overweight and Obesity. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health: Washington, DC, USA, 2001.

  2. 2.

    , , , , . Increasing the portion size of a packaged snack increases energy intake in men and women. Appetite 2004; 42: 63–69.

  3. 3.

    , , . Serving portion size influences 5-year-old but not 3-year-old children's food intakes. J Am Diet Assoc 2000; 100: 232–234.

  4. 4.

    , , . Portion size of food affects energy intake in normal-weight and overweight men and women. Am J Clin Nutr 2002; 76: 1207–1213.

  5. 5.

    , . Portion size me: plate size can decrease serving size, intake, and food waste. J Exp Psychol Appl 2014; 19: 320–332.

  6. 6.

    , , . Unit bias. Psychol Sci 2006; 17: 521–525.

  7. 7.

    , . What is a meta-analysis? Hayward Medical Communications. Available from 2009.

  8. 8.

    , , . Empirical marketing generalization using meta-analysis. Mark Sci 1995; 14: G36–G46.

  9. 9.

    , , , The PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009; 6: e1000097.

  10. 10.

    , . Extraverted children are more biased by bowl sizes than introverts. PLoS One 2013; 8: e78224.

  11. 11.

    , , . How vegetables make the meal: their hedonic and heroic impact on perceptions of the meal and of the preparer. Public Health Nutr 2013; 16: 1988–1994.

  12. 12.

    , . Plate size and color suggestibility: the Delboeuf illusion’s bias on serving and eating behavior. J Consum Res 2012; 39: 215–228.

  13. 13.

    , , . First foods most: after 18-hour fast, people drawn to starches first and vegetables last. Arch Int Med 2012; 172: 961–963.

  14. 14.

    , , . Serving bowl selection biases the amount of food served. J Nutr Educ Behav 2012; 44: 66–70.

  15. 15.

    , . Watching food-related television increases caloric intake in restrained eaters. Appetite 2011; 57: 661–664.

  16. 16.

    , , . Food compensation: do exercise ads change food intake? Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2011; 8: 6.

  17. 17.

    , . The flat-rate pricing paradox: conflicting effects of 'all-you-can-eat' buffet pricing. Rev Econ Stat 2011; 93: 193–200.

  18. 18.

    , , . When snacks become meals: how hunger and environmental cues bias food intake. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2010; 7: 63.

  19. 19.

    , , . The influence of incidental affect on consumers’ food intake. J Mark 2007; 71: 194–206.

  20. 20.

    , , , . Salad bars and fruit and vegetable consumption in elementary schools: a plate waste study. J Am Diet Assoc 2005; 105: 1789–1792.

  21. 21.

    , , . Effects of pre-portioned and family-style food service on preschool children's food intake and waste at snacktime. J Res Child Educ 1997; 12: 88–95.

  22. 22.

    , , . Biosecurity terrorism, food safety, and food consumption behavior: using experimental psychology to analyze economic behavior. J Agr Resour Econ 2009; 34: 91–108.

  23. 23.

    , . The effects of degree of acquaintance, plate size, and sharing on food intake. Appetite 2009; 52: 595–602.

  24. 24.

    , . Super bowls: serving bowl size and food consumption. JAMA 2005; 293: 1727–1728.

  25. 25.

    , , . Larger bowl size increases the amount of cereal children request, consume, and waste. J Pediatr 2014; 164: 323–326.

  26. 26.

    . Working paper Kitchen Geography and Food Serving Behavior. Cornell University: Ithaca, NY, USA.

  27. 27.

    , . Can low-fat nutrition labels lead to obesity? Obesity 2006; 14: A49–A50.

  28. 28.

    , , , . I’ll have what she's having: effects of body type on the food choices of others (Study 1). J Consum Res 2009; 36: 915–929.

Download references

Acknowledgements

BW conceived of and designed the study. BW and KJ determined eligibility for inclusion in analysis. Based on these criteria, KJ contacted authors, selected the studies, compiled and analyzed the reported data. BW drafted the paper, and BW and KJ reviewed the manuscript and approved it for submission.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

    • B Wansink
  2. Department of Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA

    • K A Johnson

Authors

  1. Search for B Wansink in:

  2. Search for K A Johnson in:

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B Wansink.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Revised

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2014.104