Abstract
Reinforcer pathology is derived from the integration of two measures: (a) self-control (i.e., delay discounting), and (b) reward valuation (i.e., behavioral economic demand). Narrative theory asserts that vividly imagining oneself in a hypothetical, yet realistic, scenario can acutely alter decision making, valuation of reinforcers such as food, and how much food is consumed. The present study measured changes in reinforcer pathology for highly palatable snacks following either a negative or neutral scenario in obese individuals. Participants (N = 48), with a body mass index of 30 or greater, rated their liking of 7 calorie-dense snack items and completed discounting and purchase demand tasks for their top-rated snack. Participants then read a randomly assigned hypothetical scenario (i.e., a devastating hurricane [negative] or minor storm [neutral]), completed the tasks again, and were given ad libitum access to their top 3 ranked snack foods. Results indicated that delay discounting, demand for participants' top-rated snack food, and negative affect all increased in the hurricane group compared with the minor storm group. The hurricane group also consumed more calories, even when hunger was standardized with a preload meal bar. Consistent with reinforcer pathology, these results suggest that vivid consideration of a devastating scenario constricts the temporal window and increases demand for hedonic snack foods among obese individuals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).