An observational study of food-related emotional expectancies, diet quality and comfort eating in the UK adult population

29/10/2026

AI Summary

Branded HFSS foods elicited stronger positive emotional expectancies than generic non-HFSS foods in UK adults.
Greater positive expectancies for HFSS foods correlated with poorer diet quality, notably for ice cream sundaes, fizzy drinks and chocolate.
Positive HFSS expectancies and negative expectancies for HFSS and non-HFSS associated with more frequent comfort eating; policy and behavioural interventions recommended.

TL;DR (AI Generated)

The present research aimed to identify food and non-alcoholic beverages UK adults most expected to bring positive emotions; test influences of high fat, salt and/or sugar (HFSS) and branding on expectancies; and investigate associations of expectancies with diet quality and comfort eating (i.e. eating induced by negative emotions).

We ranked means of positive expectancies, conducted multilevel modelling to test influences of HFSS and branding on expectancies and examined correlations among expectancies, diet quality and comfort eating.

Greater positive expectancies for HFSS and negative expectancies for HFSS and non-HFSS were associated with more frequent comfort eating (rs = 0·08 to 0·30, ps < ·05).

Basic summary

Br J Nutr. 2026 Oct 28:1-11. doi: 10.1017/S0007114526109313. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

According to expectancy theory, people eat food that they expect will bring positive emotions. The present research aimed to identify food and non-alcoholic beverages UK adults most expected to bring positive emotions; test influences of high fat, salt and/or sugar (HFSS) and branding on expectancies; and investigate associations of expectancies with diet quality and comfort eating (i.e. eating induced by negative emotions). A representative sample of UK adults (n 1203; M_age = 47 years; 52 % women; 87 % white) viewed food and non-alcoholic beverage images and completed the Anticipated Effects of Food Scale-Brief, a food frequency questionnaire, and questions about comfort eating and sociodemographic background. We ranked means of positive expectancies, conducted multilevel modelling to test influences of HFSS and branding on expectancies and examined correlations among expectancies, diet quality and comfort eating. Participants more strongly expected eating branded HFSS (e.g. Cadbury Twirl chocolate) v. generic non-HFSS (e.g. prawn curry) would result in positive emotions [b = 0·10, se = 0·04, p = ·02, 95 % CI (0·02, 0·18)]. Greater positive expectancies for HFSS – branded and generic – were associated with worse diet quality, especially positive expectancies for ice cream sundaes, fizzy drinks and chocolate (rs = -0·14 to -0·19, ps < ·001). Greater positive expectancies for HFSS and negative expectancies for HFSS and non-HFSS were associated with more frequent comfort eating (rs = 0·08 to 0·30, ps < ·05). Targeting positive HFSS expectancies through food environment policy and behavioural programmes may be a promising strategy for improving diet quality and reducing comfort eating in the UK adult population. Adults who comfort eat may also benefit from challenging negative expectancies for all foods.

PMID:42947326 | DOI:10.1017/S0007114526109313

Document this CPD