Abstract
Group data means from individuals who self-assess as emotional eaters do not reliably show increased food intake in response to stress or negative emotions. This inconsistency in predictive validity of self-reported emotional eating (EE) could be attributable to unconsidered moderation of the relationship between self-reported EE and behavioral measures of EE. Greater emotional relief from stress by eating may provide enhanced negative reinforcement and promote future EE in response to stress as a form of self-medication. Thus, we predicted that greater emotional relief from stress by eating (decrease in negative affect from stress to post-eating) would moderate the extent to which heightened stress reactivity (measured by systolic blood pressure, SBP) moderates the relationship between self-reported EE and food intake post-stress. We also hypothesized that self-reported EE would not predict greater food consumption on the rest day. 43 undergraduate women completed online assessments of eating behaviors. Participants were given snacks to eat after a mental stress task (TSST) or rest period on separate days in counterbalanced order. Our prediction was supported, as the moderated moderation model (PROCESS model 3) was highly significant on the stress day. Self-reported EE predicted increased food intake post-stress only under conditions of high stress reactivity and high emotional relief. On the rest day, self-reported EE predicted greater snack food intake only when SBP was high. This conditional increased intake substantiates stress as a promoter of snack food consumption for women with greater EE. Overall, our findings identified factors that may distinguish the subset of self-reported emotional eaters who are more likely to display EE behaviors in a laboratory setting, yet further studies are needed to directly test whether negative reinforcement via emotional relief from stress by eating drives enhanced EE following stress.