Another Critical Slip-up Found Over I-BET151 And The Way To Avoid It

78 (SE = 0.09), and in the majority condition M = 1.11 (SE = 0.10). Further follow-up analyses showed that this was due to low normative relevance reducing how much participants would serve themselves in GSK2656157 the large portion condition, F(1,313) = 9.55, p in the large portion condition. Table 4 Average expected amount served of each food in grams, and the magnitude of the portion size effect across experimental conditions in grams and in calories. This was confirmed by the omnibus ANOVA including portion size, normative relevance and presence of a picture, which revealed a main effect of portion size, F(1,313) = 207.54, p I-BET151 mw being generally higher in the majority condition than in the minority condition. FIGURE 1 Standardized average expected amount served across the portion size, presence of a picture and normative relevance conditions. Contrary to our predictions, the presence of a picture of the portion size had no main or interaction effects, all ps > 0.10. Additional Analyses Dietary restraint, perceived self-regulatory success, BMI, hunger, Oxygenase social identification with Dutch women, and self-esteem did not moderate the effect of portion size, normative relevance nor the interaction between normative relevance and portion size (all ps > 0.10). Believability of the cover story was moderate, with M = 3.8 (SD = 1.47) measured on a 7-point scale. There was an interaction between believability of the cover story and portion size, F(1,309) = 11.20, p