Table 1.
Participant characteristics.a
| Overall | |
|---|---|
| N | 166 |
| Age (years) | 39.7 ± 8.3 |
| Body Mass Index (kg/m2) | 31.6 ± 7.8 |
| Sex (M/F) | 82/84 |
| Highest Education Level Completed | |
| Attended high school | 2 |
| Completed high school | 25 |
| Some college/vocational training | 32 |
| Completed 2-year college | 36 |
| Completed 4-year college | 46 |
| Completed graduate/professional school | 25 |
| Self-reported Minority Status | |
| Minority (non-Caucasian)b | 41 |
| Non-minority (Caucasian) | 125 |
| Total Household Income (USD) | |
| <$40,000 | 41 |
| $40,000 – $79,999 | 65 |
| ≥$80,000 | 60 |
| Reinforcing Value of Foodc | 546.1 ± 1190.4 |
| Reinforcing Value of Non-Food Alternativesd | 879.9 ± 1295.7 |
| Total Time Spent Responding for Food (minutes) | 3.26 ± 5.10 |
| Total Time Spent Responding for Non-Food Alternatives (minutes) | 4.74 ± 6.22 |
a
Plus-minus values are means ± SD.
b
Of the 41 non-Caucasian participants, 1 self-identified as “Asian/Pacific Islander”, 31 as “Black/African American”, 4 as “Hispanic” and 7 as “More than one race”.
c
Reinforcing value of food (food reinforcement) was measured by the total number of responses participants made for food in a computerized choice task.
d
Reinforcing value of non-food alternatives was measured by the total number of responses participants made for reinforcers other than food in a computerized choice task.