Emphasising Personal Investment Effects Weight Loss and Hedonic Thoughts about Food after Obesity Surgery

Table 2

Intervention effects on hedonic thoughts and weight loss.

Variable	Control (𝑁=46)	Investment (𝑁=45)	𝑡 or 𝜒	𝑃	Effect size 𝑟
	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)
Emotion	2.97 (0.97)	2.88 (1.11)	𝑡(87)=0.42	0.33
PFS aggregate	3.24 (0.98)	2.88 (1.06)	𝑡(84)=1.61	0.05	0.17
PFS available	3.25 (1.03)	3.0 (1.14)	𝑡(84)=1.03	0.15	0.11
PFS present	3.40 (1.18)	2.86 (1.22)	𝑡(84)=2.10	0.01	0.22
PFS tasted	3.09 (1.06)	2.75 (1.08)	𝑡(84)=1.47	0.07	0.16
High-fat foods	58.35 (6.86)	52.57 (11.97)	𝑈=667.0,  𝑧=−2.05	0.02	0.22
Low-fat foods	48.12 (7.9)	51.24 (9.15)	𝑡(83)=−1.67	0.05	0.18
Self-efficacy in future weight loss	3.10 (1.35)	3.91 (0.97)	𝑈=596.0,  𝑧=−2.80	0.002	0.3
Sensation to eat	1.85 (0.92)	1.82 (1.11)	𝑈=842.0,  𝑧=−0.552	0.29
Hunger	2.15 (0.92)	2.51 (0.89)	𝑈=723.0,  𝑧=−1.64	0.05	0.17
Intent to eat less	3.78 (1.16)	4.04 (0.87)	𝑈=806.0,  𝑧=−0.870	0.19
F/up weight change (kg)	−.85 (6.00)	−6.77 (7.21)	𝑡(28)=−2.44	0.02	0.4

Source: postsurgery participant data; PFS: Power of Food Scale [40].
Cohen’s effect size [49]: small 0.10; medium 0.30; large 0.50.