Examines reward sensitivity's role in predicting eating issues among early adolescents, suggesting targeted interventions.
Objective Early adolescence is characterized by the onset of mental health problems, including eating pathology (e.g., body image concerns, restrictive eating). Inhibitory control (IC) and reward sensitivity (RS) are two key traits that have been implicated in the development of eating problems. IC is defined as the ability to suppress a prepotent response to facilitate goal‐directed behavior; RS refers to individuals' responsivity to reward‐related stimuli (e.g., food). Despite growing research on IC and RS, little work has examined their joint contribution in predicting emerging eating problems in early adolescents. Further, no work has examined how neurophysiological correlates of IC, like the P3 component, interact with RS to predict subsequent eating pathology. Method We analyzed two waves of data from 63 healthy early adolescents (39 girls; Mean age/SD at T1 = 11.01/1.18 years), collected approximately 1 year apart. Youths completed an EEG Go/No‐Go task and reported on their eating problems at T1 and T2; they also reported on their RS at T1. Results We found a moderating effect of RS on the association between the No‐Go P3 and disordered eating symptoms: controlling for T1 disordered eating symptoms, a smaller No‐Go P3 at T1 predicted greater disordered eating symptoms at T2, specifically for those with higher RS at T1. Contrary to our expectations, higher, but not lower, commission errors at T1 predicted lower disordered eating symptoms at T2. Discussion We contribute novel evidence on the moderating effect of RS on the prospective association between IC and eating pathology in early adolescence. Future studies can leverage these findings to inform IC‐related preventions for youths at risk for eating problems, particularly those with heightened RS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: