But apparently this concept isn’t that obvious. The study seems obvious and common sense would conclude it probably wasn’t necessary. The researchers concluded that the same optical and size-contrast illusions that affect our own portion control are at play when we feed our pets. Food amounts did not vary significantly between the large scoop/small bowl and the small scoop/ large bowl treatments. Statistical analysis confirmed that meal sizes were consistently smaller when owners used a small scoop and small bowl, and consistently larger when the large scoop and large bowl were used. No combination was used more than one time for each pet owner. Owners fed with a small scoop and small bowl, a large scoop and small bowl, a small scoop and large bowl and a large scoop and large bowl. Each owner with his or her dog visited the research facility four times for normal feedings of kibbled dog food - using four different feeding utensil combinations. The Studyįifty-four dogs and their owners were randomly chosen for the study. A recent study confirmed that, indeed, the size of food bowls and serving utensils influence the meal size owners feed to their pets. ![]() ![]() Research with dog owners has suggested that the size of food bowls and food scooping devices might be a significant contributor to the pet obesity problem. It is the logic behind serving dieters their meals on saucers instead of plates and reducing the size of serving utensils. These effects are believed to be the result of two famous psychological concepts, the Delboeuf optical illusion and the Ebbinghaus-Titchener size-contrast illusion. It has long been known in human weight research that the size of food bowls, plates, and utensils influence the amount of food served and consumed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |