Table 2.
Mediation and Moderated Mediation Models
| # | Model Path/Effect: Predictor → Outcome | β | SE | LL | UL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| 1 | a: Perceptual measure of odor imagery ability → Food intake | 0.350 | 0.133 | 0.081 | 0.620 |
| 1 | b: Food intake → Δ Body fat % | 0.505 | 0.182 | 0.136 | 0.874 |
| 1 | c’ Direct: Perceptual measure of odor imagery ability → Δ Body fat % | 0.019 | 0.160 | −0.306 | 0.345 |
| 1 | a × b Indirect: Perceptual measure of odor imagery ability → Food intake → Δ Body fat % | 0.177 | 0.091 | 0.031 | 0.382 |
|
| |||||
| 2 | a: Neural measure of odor imagery ability → Food intake | 0.407 | 0.166 | 0.063 | 0.751 |
| 2 | b: Food intake → Δ Body fat % | 0.722 | 0.221 | 0.264 | 1.181 |
| 2 | c’ Direct: Neural measure of odor imagery ability → Δ Body fat % | −0.120 | 0.198 | −0.530 | 0.290 |
| 2 | a × b Indirect: Neural measure of odor imagery ability → Food intake → Δ Body fat % | 0.294 | 0.160 | 0.022 | 0.647 |
|
| |||||
| 3 | a: Perceptual measure of odor imagery ability → Food craving | −0.180 | 0.133 | −0.449 | 0.090 |
| 3 | Moderation: Perceptual measure of odor imagery ability × Food liking → Food craving | 0.368 | 0.112 | 0.141 | 0.595 |
| 3 | b: Food craving → Δ BMI | 0.439 | 0.174 | 0.087 | 0.790 |
| 3 | c’ Direct: Perceptual measure of odor imagery ability → Δ BMI | −0.082 | 0.154 | −0.393 | 0.230 |
| 3 | Conditional a × b indirect (Low food liking): Perceptual measure of odor imagery ability → Food craving → Δ BMI | −0.079 | 0.103 | −0.347 | 0.055 |
| 3 | Conditional a × b indirect (Moderate food liking): Perceptual measure of odor imagery ability → Food craving → Δ BMI | 0.033 | 0.103 | −0.347 | 0.158 |
| 3 | Conditional a × b indirect (High food liking): Perceptual measure of odor imagery ability → Food craving → Δ BMI | 0.184 | 0.109 | 0.011 | 0.434 |
| 3 | Index of moderated mediation: Perceptual measure of odor imagery ability × Food liking → Food craving → Δ BMI | 0.161 | 0.104 | 0.007 | 0.411 |
We controlled for sex and food liking in Models 1 and 2 and for hunger in Model 3 since these variables were correlated with food cue reactivity (see Supplementary Table 6). Models 1 and 2 are visually depicted in Fig. 6g and Model 3 in Fig. 6h. LL, confidence interval lower limit; UL, confidence interval upper limit. Bold font indicates significant effects at p < 0.05.