COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS AND MEASUREMENT TYPES: TWO SATIETY STUDIES

DAI H.¹*, ANDON M.², HERSKOVIC J.E.^3
1Research Development and Clinical Investigation, Children’s Mercy Hospitals and Clinics, Missouri, United States.
²Center for Research Quality and Innovation, ConAgra Foods Inc., Nebraska, United States.
³Center for Research Quality and Innovation, ConAgra Foods Inc., Nebraska, United States.
* Corresponding Author : hdai@cmh.edu

Received : 31-07-2013     Accepted : 06-03-2014     Published : 31-05-2014
Volume : 5     Issue : 1       Pages : 52 - 58
Food Sci Tech Lett 5.1 (2014):52-58

Keywords : Satiety, Dichotomous Measure, Continuous Measure, Likert Scale, Crossover Design, Parallel Design
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : The authors thank Ursula Lowczyk, Casey Smith and Shawn Ward for their dedication and expertise in conducting the in-life portion of these experiments

Satiety is subjective, variable and difficult to measure. We compared the utility of a dichotomous versus a continuous measure of subjective satiety and a crossover versus a stratified parallel design. Study participants consumed a control or test meal and recorded appetite sensations for the next 5 hours. Significant treatment and time effects were found using the dichotomous measure. Only a time effect was observed for the longitudinal continuous measure. The cross-over design yielded inconsistent results and a significant treatment by day interaction. Our study suggests that discrete measures, with less psychological/rating variability, could be more powerful and robust than continuous measures in assessment of small to moderate satiety effects. We advocate incorporating both discrete and continuous measures in measure of complex sensation. For studies with confounding adaptation effects, a stratified parallel design might help reduce the experimental halo when the within-subject variation is larger than the between-subject variation. This study provides a direct comparison of four satiety measures after food consumption and two commonly used designs. The findings may help practitioners design experiments, select response options, and determine measurement scales based on study objectives, the potential impact of confounding factors and the expected degree of difference in satiety effects. The results about variable selection and experimental comparisons might be extended to other disciplines in case of (subjective) measurements of human behavior, motivation and perception.

[1] Dall T.M., Fulgoni V.L., Zhang Y., Reimers K.R., Packard P.T. & Astwood J.D . (2009) Am. J. Health Promot. , 23, 412 - 422  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[2] Dall T.M., Fulgoni V.L., Zhang Y., Reimers K.R., Packard P.T., Astwood J.D. (2009) Am. J. Health Promot. , 23, 423 - 430.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[3] Reid M. & Hetherington M . (1997) Neuro & Biobehav Reviews , 21(3), 295 - 308.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[4] Halton T.L. & Hu F.B . (2004) J. Am. Coll. Nutr. , 23(5), 373 - 385.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[5] Solah V.A., Kerr D.A., Adikara C.D., Meng X., Binns C.W., Zhu D.A. and Prince R.L. (2010) Appetite, 54, 485-491.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[6] Hursel R., Van Der Zee L. & Westerterp-Plantega M.S. (2010) Br. J. Nutr., 103, 775-780.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[7] Chaput J.P., Gilbert J.A., Gregersen N.T., Pedersen S.D. & Sjodin A.M. (2010) Appetite, 54, 583-586.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[8] Ratliff J., Leite J.O., De Ogburn R., Puglisi M.J., Vanheest J. & Fernandez M.L. (2010) Nutr. Resr., 30, 96-103.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[9] Schroeder N., Gallaher D.D., Arndt E.A. & Marquart L. (2009) Appetite, 53, 363-369  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[10] Stubbs R.J., Hughes D.A., Johnstone A.M., Rowley E., Reid C., Elia M., Stratton R., Delargy H., King N. & Blundell J.E. (2000) Brit J. Nutr., 84, 405-415.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus  

[11] Blundell J.E. (1979) Nutrition and Lifestyles, Applied Science Publishers, London, 21-42.  
» CrossRef   » Google Scholar   » PubMed   » DOAJ   » CAS   » Scopus