# Baker, R.B. & Kirschenbaum, D.S. (1993). Self-monitoring may be necessary for successful weight control. Behavior Therapy, 24(3), 377-394.

## Presentation on theme: "Baker, R.B. & Kirschenbaum, D.S. (1993). Self-monitoring may be necessary for successful weight control. Behavior Therapy, 24(3), 377-394."— Presentation transcript:

Baker, R.B. & Kirschenbaum, D.S. (1993). Self-monitoring may be necessary for successful weight control. Behavior Therapy, 24(3), 377-394.

56 Participants (48 women, 8 men)

Variables The monitoring of: (3) food; (4) calories; (5) water; (6) weight; (7) type of situation; (8) where food was consumed; (9) with whom food was consumed; (10) water consumption; (11) event or (12) situation in which food was consumed; (13) exercise; (14) mood; (15) fat consumption; (16) caloric total; and (17) “other variables” (1) Whether participants monitored on a particular day (2) Whether monitoring included the entire day or only a portion of the day

Significant Monitoring Variables Variables monitored that were positively correlated with weight change: – 1) Any food eaten – 2) All food eaten – 3)Time food eaten – 4) Quantity of food eaten – 5) Grams of consumed fat Variables monitored that were negatively correlated with weight change: – 6) Not monitoring

Self-Monitoring Diary

Sample Self Monitoring Diary - 1

Sample Self Monitoring Diary - 2

Sample Self Monitoring Diary - 3

Calculation of Monitoring Index monitoring of all food items eaten + monitoring of any food eaten + monitoring time food was eaten + monitoring of quantity of food eaten + monitoring of grams of consumed fat - not monitoring ------------------------------------------------------ “Monitoring Index”

Monitoring Index Ranges No monitoring for an entire week = -7 Complete monitoring for entire week = +35 – Range per week = (-7 to +35 per week) 12 weeks range: -84 to +420 18 weeks range: -126 to +630 – 12 Weeks: Q1 –84 to 42; Q2 43 to 168; Q3 169 to 294; Q4 295 to 420 – 18 weeks: Q1 -126 to 62; Q2 64 to 252; Q3 253 to 441; Q4 442 to 630

Figure 1. Percentage of days on which all food was monitored.

Figure 2. Percentage of subjects at each quartile.

Figure 3. Mean weight change for low and high monitors comparing their best to worst monitoring (based on monitoring index data)

Figure 4. Subjects who lost weight per quartile of monitoring index.

Figure 5. Mean weight change per quartile of monitoring index.

Figure 6. Mean weigh loss for subject’s who lost weight at 12 weeks but had variability in their monitoring index versus subjects who lost weight at 12 weeks but had no variability in their monitoring indexes.

Figure 7. Actual weight losses for subjects with no variability in monitoring index at 12 weeks.

Summary Not all participants monitored t particularly high levels. Monitoring: 1) Any food eaten, 2) All food eaten, 3) Time food eaten, 4)Quantity of food eaten, 5) Grams of consumed fat, and 6) Not monitoring were correlated with total weight change.

Summary Higher level monitors lost more weight than lower level monitors (between S’s). The highest level monitors with no variability lost the most weight. Regardless of one’s level of monitoring, people lost more weight during the weeks they monitored at their highest personal level (within S’s).

Impressions & Suggestions “Increased attentional focus” via self-monitoring appears beneficial in the management of weight problems. Longer term treatment may be effective due to “process” rather than “content”. The importance of self-monitoring should be emphasized early in treatment. Focus of treatment should be on behavior, not weight loss per se. “Obsessive compulsive self-regulation” appears particularly beneficial.

Download ppt "Baker, R.B. & Kirschenbaum, D.S. (1993). Self-monitoring may be necessary for successful weight control. Behavior Therapy, 24(3), 377-394."

Similar presentations