Section 5

Appendices

5.1.1 Food Lists

[M] = meat, fish; [V] = vegetable, fruit, nut, grain or seed; [N] = novel, invented

In order of presentation and including any descriptions as presented:

South Bank (1.5.1) food list:

Main list:

broccoli [V]; low-fat margarine; tofu - soya bean curd.; soft-boiled eggs; custard; spinach [V]; liver pâté [M]; skimmed milk; steamed pance - a salt-water crustacean with a soft blue shell.; celery [V]; goat’s milk cheese; hot dogs [M]; cabbage [V]; naseberry - a tropical fruit with a stringy, purple pulp.; avocado [V]; kidney [M]; black olives [V]; brynza - a Czech soft cheese; mild and yellow.; vegetable curry; pickled onions; mayonnaise; beer; butter; duck [M]; mozzarella cheese; spring onion [V]; prawns [M]; semolina [V]; mackerel [M]; yosenabi - noodles made from the kitsumi plant.; walnuts [V]; cottage cheese; black coffee; tripe [M]; eel [M]; full-fat milk; spaghetti hoops - tinned, in tomato sauce.; strong peppermints; boiled rice [V]; double cream; salami [M]; sunflower seeds [V]; boiled gurnoe root - a pale green root vegetable.; mushrooms [V]; tongue [M].

Plant ‘Non-foods’ list: "Raw, unless otherwise stated."

honeysuckle flowers; moss; maple tree leaves; boiled nettles; clover; marigold flowers.

Animal ‘Non-foods’ list: "Cooked, unless otherwise stated."

gecko meat - a type of lizard.; grasshopper; camel meat; porcupine meat; butterfly - glazed in sugar.; ostrich meat.

Family Diet Study (1.5.2) food list:

butter/ghee; pasta; chicken [M]; tomatoes [V]; ice-cream; chocolate; potatoes [V]; whole milk; brown bread; sardines [M]; carrots [V]; yoghurt; cakes; sausages [M]; peas [V]; chips [V]; sunflower margarine; white bread; lentils [V]; eggs; sweet biscuits; apples [V]; semi-skimmed milk; beefburgers [M]; oranges [V]; cheddar cheese; bananas [V]; rice [V]; lettuce [V]; liver [M].



5.1.2 Anglicized Version of the Food Neophobia Scale

Given the differences between British and American English, a few changes were made in the Food Neophobia Scale of Pliner & Hobden (1992). "Ethnic" in questions 5 and 10 was changed to "foreign", while "weird" in question 5 was changed to "strange".



5.1.3 Modern Equivalents for ‘Neuroses’ in the Early List Heuristic Studies

Various of the early US list heuristic studies were comparing ‘neurotics’ to normals. Psychopathological diagnoses have altered considerably since the 1940s, so it is necessary to ‘translate’ the terminology of these papers into modern equivalents. This is not always possible, with insufficient material presented in the papers, but I have attempted to review these papers below. I acknowledge Dr Flávio Kapczinski for his assistance as a psychiatrist.

Wallen (1945):

Wallen (1945) used US Marines "discharged for inaptitude. Every one had been diagnosed as neurotic by at least one psychiatrist? No case was included in which the neurosis was a secondary feature of a more central syndrome. Among the symptoms found in this group were functional gastric and cardiac disturbances, sleepwalking, weeping, excessive nostalgia, lack of confidence, worry, insomnia, fainting and dizzy spells, and a variety of somatic complaints. In every case the neurotic syndrome was judged severe enough to render the recruit unfit for military service" (p. 78). His Group I included "20 anxiety neurotics, 13 cases of hysteria, 12 mixed types, and 5 neurasthenics" (ibid.); while Group II included "18 cases of anxiety neurosis, 8 cases of hysteria, 17 mixed types, and 2 psychasthenics" (ibid.).

These are probably equivalent to Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD), though "hysteria" may be better translated as Somatization Disorder.

Gough (1946):

Gough (1946) used "[m]ale patients from the neuropsychiatric section of the [US Marine training] station hospital? [which] included 8 mild psychoneurotics, 27 moderate psychoneurotics, 35 severe psychoneurotics, and 9 psychopathic personalities? diagnoses were made? in accordance with the usual criteria" (p. 86).

Such patients are probably similar to those in Wallen (1945), except for those with "psychopathic personalities". "Psychopathic" was originally used as a more general term in psychiatry, which leaves us unable to interpret its meaning here. If "psychopathic" is being used more in a more specific sense, such patients have Antisocial Personality Disorder.

Wallen (1948):

Wallen now used US Marine "recruits about to be discharged for inaptitude? Every man in the discharged group was suffering from some psychiatric disability serious enough to render him unfit for military service? No feebleminded nor frankly psychotic persons were included" (p. 310).

The group was divided into a number of different syndromes, listed in Table 5.1 with possible modern equivalents. Wallen states: "Diagnostic categories follow those used in the Navy at the time of this study. Starred [*] terms were classified as Constitutional Psychopathic States" (ibid.).
 

Wallen (1948) Suggested modern equivalent (after DSM)
intra-cranial injury intra-cranial injury
miscellaneous neurosis ?
anxiety neurosis GAD, Panic Disorder or phobias
emotional instability* ?
inadequate personality* Antisocial Personality Disorder?
hysteria Somatization Disorder or GAD
mixed neurosis ?
enuresis enuresis
epilepsy epilepsy
schizoid personality* Schizoid Personality Disorder
Table 5.1: Modern equivalents for terminology used in Wallen  (1948).

In summary, Wallen (1945) and Gough (1946) mainly concern themselves with what we now call GAD. The various groups in Wallen (1948) are more complicated.



5.2.2 FRI Items Chosen by Subjects

For three of the FRIs ("strong distaste", "mild distaste" and "disgusting"), subjects had to pick items themselves following following the instructions given. This section lists their choices.

5.2.2.1 ‘Distaste’ Items

Distaste items were very varied, with only cheese, curries and brussel sprouts standing out repeated. Note subjects picked both a food that they strongly disliked (S) and one they only mildly disliked (M). Details are in Table 5.2.

Whatever a subject wrote was accepted, but some of these items may actually be invoking other responses. Specifically, some of the meats seem more likely to involve ‘disgust’; e.g. snake, which the subject concerned reported having tried once.

Many of these items are apparent as innately unpalatable, either via the trigeminal sense being ‘hot’ (curry) or otherwise irritating (alcoholic, aniseed); or via tastes, e.g. bitter (tonic water).
 
Vegetables etc.  

Vegetables

brussel sprouts (4S and 2M); tomatoes (2M and 1S for fried tomatoes); beetroot; carrots (1M and 1M for "slightly over-cooked" carrots); olives (1S and 1M); swede (1S and 1M); okra (1S and 1M); fennel (S); mushrooms (S); celery (S); parsnip (S); sweetcorn (S); artichoke (M); leek (M); cauliflower (M); asparagus (M); kidney beans (M); baked beans (M); cucumber (M); spinach (M); peas (M)
Fruit & nuts pomegranate (S); pears (S); grapefruit (S); walnuts (M); coconut (M)
Grains & pulses tofu (S); tapioca (M); semolina (M); popcorn (M)
Spreads marmite (2S); houmous (1S and 1S for tinned houmous); peanut butter (M)
Dairy & egg  
Cheese 2S: Danish blue and feta. 9M: 2 non-specific, 2 feta, 2 blue stilton, 1 each for mature cheddar, goat’s and cottage cheese
Other dairy milk (M); butter (M)
Egg fried egg (S); vodka omelette (S)
Meat  
Meat rabbit (S); snake (S); brains (S); snail (S)
Fish oysters (S); kippers (S); monkfish (M)
Curry 2S: 1 non-specific, 1 "samosa/curry". 2M: one korma, one "hot".
Sweets and puddings marzipan (S); aniseed (S); Christmas pudding (M); ice cream (M); butterscotch sweets (M)
Beverages  
Alcoholic brandy (S); bitter (S); whisky (M); and note "vodka omelette" above
Other tonic water (S); non-diet coke (S); Coca-Cola (M)
Table 5.2: ‘Distaste’ items selected by subjects.

5.2.2.2 ‘Disgust’ Items

‘Disgust’ is typically associated with two categories of items: bodily excretions and secretions and novel meats. Items chosen by subjects generally fit into one of these two categories, with faeces, vomit, liver and slugs all favourites.
 

Excretions

 
Faeces human (3), sewage, carnivore, cat, dog, cow, horse, animal
Vomit human (5), cat
Other phlegm, human hair
Novel meats  
Organ meats (i.e. novel parts of familiar animals) liver (3), caviar (2), kidneys, lamb’s brains, black pudding
"Creepy-crawlies" slugs (3), snails, worms, frog spawn, rat
other jellied eels, raw horse
Familiar foods espresso coffee, garlic, cabbage, papaya
Other dirt off the street, a dirty dishcloth, paint
Table 5.2: ‘Distaste’ items selected by subjects.

The remaining items may be more ‘distaste’ (e.g. espresso, garlic) or ‘danger’ (e.g. paint). We also see two items relating to "dirt". The subject who gave papaya said that this was because its ammonia-like smell reminded her of urine.



5.2.3 FRI Results in Full

The following Tables (5.4-5.24) give the full FRI results for each of the items considered in the thesis; index given as Table 5.3. The raw data is on 101mm VAS, while the transformed data is an arcsine root transformation after scaling the VAS on to a (0, 1) range.
 
Table Item
5.4 Mild distaste
5.5 Strong distaste
5.6 Lemon juice
5.7 Quinine
5.8 Wasabi
5.9 Disgust
5.10 Carcinogen
5.11 Cramps
5.12 Food poisoning
5.13 Cardboard
5.14 Cockroach
5.15 Water buffalo
5.16 Clover
5.17 Moss
5.18 Gurnoe
5.19 Pance
5.20 Skoikos
5.21 BSE
5.22 Salmonella
5.23 Differs
5.24 Cigarette
Table 5.3: Index of FRI results. [To be hyperlinked]
"Mild distaste"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.02
0.20
68
27
2 Taste
1.04
0.26
75
23
3 Ideational
0.65
0.30
41
35
4 Contamination
0.50
0.37
20
45
5 Stomach
0.75
0.33
51
24
6 Child
0.64
0.40
35
43
7 Average person
0.57
0.23
25
26
8 Nausea
0.44
0.31
12
39
9 Temporary discomfort
0.31
0.29
5
19
10 Permanent damage
0.15
0.16
1
5
11 Social
0.13
0.15
1
4
12 Personal-moral
0.14
0.13
1
5
13 How hungry
0.79
0.37
50
37
Number completed = 41; number included = 40

Number not rejecting = 1

Table 5.4: FRI results for "mild distaste".

 
 
"Strong distaste"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.32
0.22
96
15
2 Taste
1.34
0.21
97
11
3 Ideational
0.71
0.40
50
40
4 Contamination
0.64
0.50
24
48
5 Stomach
0.86
0.44
52
57
6 Child
0.82
0.44
51
56
7 Average person
0.69
0.31
38
30
8 Nausea
0.75
0.41
55
62
9 Temporary discomfort
0.46
0.40
12
49
10 Permanent damage
0.19
0.20
2
5
11 Social
0.18
0.21
2
6
12 Personal-moral
0.13
0.15
2
3
13 How hungry
1.01
0.35
71
39
Number completed = 39; number included = 39
Table 5.5: FRI results for "strong distaste".

 
 
"Lemon juice"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
0.94
0.32
57
44
2 Taste
0.76
0.34
44
52
3 Ideational
0.36
0.30
8
28
4 Contamination
0.22
0.25
2
10
5 Stomach
0.46
0.30
24
46
6 Child
0.72
0.41
49
50
7 Average person
0.99
0.30
70
34
8 Nausea
0.21
0.24
2
8
9 Temporary discomfort
0.30
0.32
4
11
10 Permanent damage
0.16
0.20
2
5
11 Social
0.12
0.16
1
4
12 Personal-moral
0.11
0.10
1
4
13 How hungry
0.71
0.43
34
56
Number completed = 40; number included = 36

Number not rejecting = 4

Table 5.6: FRI results for "lemon juice".
"Quinine"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.36
0.26
100
19
2 Taste
1.28
0.28
96
28
3 Ideational
0.83
0.39
51
21
4 Contamination
0.45
0.46
5
49
5 Stomach
0.87
0.41
52
34
6 Child
1.28
0.30
98
24
7 Average person
1.35
0.23
96
15
8 Nausea
0.56
0.48
23
58
9 Temporary discomfort
0.55
0.51
18
55
10 Permanent damage
0.35
0.44
3
19
11 Social
0.25
0.36
2
10
12 Personal-moral
0.19
0.25
1
6
13 How hungry
1.21
0.36
87
28
Number completed = 40; number included = 39
Table 5.7: FRI results for "quinine".

 
 
"Wasabi"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.11
0.36
80
50
2 Taste
1.06
0.38
74
53
3 Ideational
0.65
0.40
34
31
4 Contamination
0.44
0.45
8
42
5 Stomach
0.64
0.37
39
38
6 Child
1.06
0.37
76
46
7 Average person
1.09
0.36
75
40
8 Nausea
0.37
0.40
7
24
9 Temporary discomfort
0.55
0.40
25
40
10 Permanent damage
0.17
0.23
1
3
11 Social
0.14
0.21
1
4
12 Personal-moral
0.13
0.17
1
4
13 How hungry
1.06
0.42
80
47
Number completed = 40; number included = 33

Number not rejecting = 7

Table 5.8: FRI results for "wasabi".

 
 
"Disgust"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.45
0.16
100
4
2 Taste
1.41
0.22
99
5
3 Ideational
1.30
0.44
100
6
4 Contamination
1.17
0.44
96
45
5 Stomach
1.39
0.28
100
5
6 Child
1.37
0.29
101
3
7 Average person
1.25
0.38
99
24
8 Nausea
1.09
0.42
83
46
9 Temporary discomfort
0.67
0.43
36
57
10 Permanent damage
0.38
0.40
6
31
11 Social
0.72
0.53
31
80
12 Personal-moral
0.55
0.48
17
53
13 How hungry
1.41
0.25
101
5
Number completed = 40; number included = 40
Table 5.9: FRI results for "disgust".

 
 
"Carcinogen"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.45
0.19
101
3
2 Taste
0.75
0.53
49
77
3 Ideational
1.32
0.36
100
10
4 Contamination
1.30
0.30
98
24
5 Stomach
1.40
0.24
100
5
6 Child
1.51
0.10
101
1
7 Average person
1.46
0.18
101
3
8 Nausea
0.73
0.54
53
79
9 Temporary discomfort
0.65
0.53
32
78
10 Permanent damage
1.16
0.45
93
29
11 Social
0.61
0.55
19
63
12 Personal-moral
0.67
0.55
25
73
13 How hungry
1.41
0.21
100
6
Number completed = 40; number included = 39

Number not rejecting = 1

Table 5.10: FRI results for "carcinogen".

 
 
"Cramps"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.32
0.26
96
21
2 Taste
0.68
0.49
28
59
3 Ideational
1.20
0.34
94
36
4 Contamination
1.11
0.35
83
38
5 Stomach
1.31
0.24
97
18
6 Child
1.47
0.12
101
3
7 Average person
1.41
0.16
99
7
8 Nausea
0.79
0.46
51
56
9 Temporary discomfort
1.06
0.42
78
39
10 Permanent damage
0.35
0.33
6
41
11 Social
0.33
0.34
5
29
12 Personal-moral
0.35
0.39
6
23
13 How hungry
1.13
0.38
83
33
Number completed = 40; number included = 40
Table 5.11: FRI results for "cramps".

 
 
"Food poisoning"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.39
0.19
98
6
2 Taste
0.87
0.52
75
75
3 Ideational
1.29
0.32
97
11
4 Contamination
1.28
0.26
90
14
5 Stomach
1.39
0.15
98
8
6 Child
1.47
0.12
101
3
7 Average person
1.43
0.12
99
5
8 Nausea
1.04
0.45
80
49
9 Temporary discomfort
0.92
0.42
69
32
10 Permanent damage
0.83
0.37
52
53
11 Social
0.61
0.48
26
55
12 Personal-moral
0.51
0.48
13
20
13 How hungry
1.33
0.22
95
15
Number completed = 21; number included = 21
Table 5.12: FRI results for "food poisoning".

 
 
"Cardboard"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.16
0.32
86
44
2 Taste
1.15
0.29
82
38
3 Ideational
1.12
0.31
82
45
4 Contamination
0.65
0.50
46
65
5 Stomach
1.05
0.30
65
44
6 Child
1.35
0.23
99
10
7 Average person
1.36
0.19
99
13
8 Nausea
0.47
0.41
11
51
9 Temporary discomfort
0.59
0.48
26
69
10 Permanent damage
0.36
0.41
4
25
11 Social
0.41
0.45
7
40
12 Personal-moral
0.26
0.38
2
9
13 How hungry
1.12
0.43
80
42
Number completed = 21; number included = 20

(Number who had tried = 11)

Table 5.13: FRI results for "cardboard".

 
 
"Cockroach"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.47
0.16
101
2
2 Taste
1.45
0.18
101
3
3 Ideational
1.47
0.16
101
2
4 Contamination
1.31
0.41
101
15
5 Stomach
1.44
0.20
101
5
6 Child
1.49
0.14
101
2
7 Average person
1.51
0.10
101
1
8 Nausea
1.21
0.39
95
29
9 Temporary discomfort
0.78
0.45
53
58
10 Permanent damage
0.47
0.42
14
44
11 Social
0.94
0.48
74
70
12 Personal-moral
0.61
0.48
25
53
13 How hungry
1.43
0.21
101
3
Number completed = 40; number included = 38

Number not rejecting = 2

(Number who had tried = 0)

Table 5.14: FRI results for "cockroach".

 
 
"Water buffalo"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
0.78
0.23
50
29
2 Taste
0.76
0.23
47
28
3 Ideational
0.75
0.14
50
16
4 Contamination
0.53
0.18
24
29
5 Stomach
0.69
0.17
50
27
6 Child
0.80
0.24
50
17
7 Average person
0.92
0.18
60
19
8 Nausea
0.34
0.23
7
18
9 Temporary discomfort
0.31
0.21
8
11
10 Permanent damage
0.18
0.13
3
6
11 Social
0.39
0.29
14
34
12 Personal-moral
0.34
0.30
6
23
13 How hungry
0.66
0.32
37
29
Number completed = 40; number included = 20

(Number who had tried = 1)

Number not rejecting = 9

Number who were vegetarian = 12

Table 5.15: FRI results for "water buffalo".

 
 
"Clover"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
0.85
0.27
51
29
2 Taste
0.79
0.31
51
24
3 Ideational
0.66
0.27
43
30
4 Contamination
0.37
0.33
8
24
5 Stomach
0.64
0.29
49
28
6 Child
0.83
0.34
51
40
7 Average person
1.02
0.30
61
38
8 Nausea
0.24
0.20
5
9
9 Temporary discomfort
0.26
0.25
5
12
10 Permanent damage
0.21
0.23
3
8
11 Social
0.29
0.33
5
9
12 Personal-moral
0.23
0.31
2
10
13 How hungry
0.73
0.44
41
51
Number completed = 40; number included = 32

Number not rejecting = 8

(Number who had tried = 13)

Table 5.16: FRI results for "clover".

 
 
"Moss"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.09
0.31
80
38
2 Taste
1.01
0.30
63
39
3 Ideational
0.95
0.35
58
41
4 Contamination
0.60
0.39
31
41
5 Stomach
0.85
0.28
51
17
6 Child
1.14
0.34
86
43
7 Average person
1.27
0.25
95
23
8 Nausea
0.45
0.32
16
36
9 Temporary discomfort
0.36
0.35
6
26
10 Permanent damage
0.25
0.27
4
11
11 Social
0.44
0.37
12
39
12 Personal-moral
0.23
0.32
2
7
13 How hungry
1.02
0.44
77
45
Number completed = 41; number included = 37

Number not rejecting = 4

(Number who had tried = 3)

Table 5.17: FRI results for "moss".

 
 
"Gurnoe"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
0.72
0.21
47
21
2 Taste
0.71
0.21
40
20
3 Ideational
0.61
0.21
41
29
4 Contamination
0.37
0.27
8
30
5 Stomach
0.59
0.27
46
29
6 Child
0.61
0.28
44
35
7 Average person
0.84
0.13
58
12
8 Nausea
0.30
0.28
5
22
9 Temporary discomfort
0.29
0.21
6
9
10 Permanent damage
0.27
0.29
3
14
11 Social
0.18
0.21
2
7
12 Personal-moral
0.18
0.23
2
3
13 How hungry
0.46
0.34
21
37
Number completed = 40; number included = 19

Number not rejecting = 21

Number who had tried = 0 

Table 5.18: FRI results for "gurnoe".

 
 
"Pance"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
0.87
0.36
49
52
2 Taste
0.87
0.36
47
51
3 Ideational
0.78
0.32
51
60
4 Contamination
0.62
0.45
32
76
5 Stomach
0.81
0.32
50
53
6 Child
0.91
0.36
51
48
7 Average person
0.80
0.23
50
18
8 Nausea
0.38
0.41
4
62
9 Temporary discomfort
0.25
0.26
4
14
10 Permanent damage
0.24
0.26
2
14
11 Social
0.25
0.23
4
12
12 Personal-moral
0.26
0.24
3
16
13 How hungry
0.71
0.34
37
36
Number completed = 39; number included = 11

Number not rejecting = 19

Number who had tried = 2

Number who were vegetarian = 12

Table 5.19: FRI results for "pance".
"Skoikos"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
0.85
0.20
57
30
2 Taste
0.85
0.22
59
36
3 Ideational
0.67
0.16
44
25
4 Contamination
0.49
0.22
20
33
5 Stomach
0.61
0.34
31
42
6 Child
0.77
0.32
50
27
7 Average person
0.88
0.28
48
37
8 Nausea
0.68
0.42
33
41
9 Temporary discomfort
0.56
0.41
14
48
10 Permanent damage
0.39
0.39
9
16
11 Social
0.36
0.38
8
15
12 Personal-moral
0.32
0.37
4
12
13 How hungry
0.74
0.32
35
33
Number completed = 40; number included = 8

Number not rejecting = 30

Number who had tried = 1

Number who were vegetarian = 12

Table 5.20: FRI results for "skoikos".

 
 
"BSE"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.24
0.27
97
27
2 Taste
0.78
0.56
39
92
3 Ideational
1.25
0.32
96
31
4 Contamination
1.16
0.39
95
48
5 Stomach
1.25
0.35
96
30
6 Child
1.45
0.19
101
3
7 Average person
1.35
0.32
99
5
8 Nausea
0.83
0.48
61
68
9 Temporary discomfort
0.61
0.48
21
66
10 Permanent damage
0.93
0.37
66
53
11 Social
0.64
0.48
43
69
12 Personal-moral
0.65
0.46
41
60
13 How hungry
1.31
0.25
96
14
Number completed = 40; number included = 25

Number not rejecting = 3

Number who were vegetarian = 12

Table 5.21: FRI results for "BSE".

 
 
"Salmonella"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.23
0.30
93
29
2 Taste
0.83
0.56
47
89
3 Ideational
1.26
0.28
95
26
4 Contamination
1.14
0.37
92
42
5 Stomach
1.23
0.29
92
33
6 Child
1.42
0.18
100
7
7 Average person
1.36
0.21
98
10
8 Nausea
0.90
0.49
63
67
9 Temporary discomfort
0.67
0.46
42
60
10 Permanent damage
0.74
0.43
41
54
11 Social
0.54
0.46
21
50
12 Personal-moral
0.57
0.45
23
57
13 How hungry
1.21
0.39
93
31
Number completed = 41; number included = 29

Number not rejecting = 0

Number who were vegetarian = 12

Table 5.22: FRI results for "Salmonella".

 
 
"Differs"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
0.95
0.31
58
32
2 Taste
0.83
0.34
51
28
3 Ideational
0.91
0.36
60
38
4 Contamination
0.70
0.38
43
36
5 Stomach
0.84
0.37
54
35
6 Child
1.10
0.41
81
47
7 Average person
1.05
0.30
71
34
8 Nausea
0.54
0.34
22
42
9 Temporary discomfort
0.47
0.37
18
36
10 Permanent damage
0.41
0.39
11
28
11 Social
0.28
0.34
4
9
12 Personal-moral
0.34
0.46
4
11
13 How hungry
0.77
0.43
53
58
Number completed = 40; number included = 32

Number not rejecting = 8

Table 5.23: FRI results for "Differs".

 
 
"Cigarette"
Transformed scale
Raw scale
FRI question Mean S.d. Median IQR
1 Overall
1.02
0.39
64
56
2 Taste
0.99
0.41
60
58
3 Ideational
1.06
0.36
76
47
4 Contamination
0.78
0.35
51
21
5 Lung (‘Stomach’)
1.21
0.34
96
42
6 Child
1.43
0.20
100
3
7 Average person
0.80
0.18
53
19
8 Nausea
0.56
0.44
23
48
9 Temporary discomfort
0.56
0.43
19
55
10 Permanent damage
0.88
0.51
72
70
11 Social
0.48
0.40
14
54
12 Personal-moral
0.72
0.50
54
62
Number completed = 40; number included = 34

Number not rejecting = 6

(Number who had tried = 36)

Table 5.24: FRI results for "Cigarette".



5.3.1 Modified Cincinnati Neophobia Scale
 
1. I enjoy trying new foods
True
False
2. I'm not likely to try new dishes in a restaurant
True
False
3. I think that many foods are disgusting
True
False
4. I like to try new restaurants
True
False
5. I only eat because I have to eat
True
False
6. Having to eat is a bother
True
False
7. I won't try a food if I don't know what it is
True
False
8. I have been called a picky eater
True
False
9. I like trying different foreign food
True
False
10. I find many foods distasteful
True
False
11 I like to stick to the foods I know
True
False
12. Most of the time I can take or leave food
True
False
13. I consider myself a picky eater
True
False
14. I enjoy trying unusual foods
True
False
15. I love to eat
True
False

The modified Cininnati Neophobia Scale (CNS) is a simplified version of the neophobia questionnaire devised and used by Raudenbush et al. (1995), but subjects merely answer Yes or No as opposed to the original Likert scale. In addition, I randomised the order of the questions and re-worded one question for an English audience (I like trying different ethnic food changed to I like trying different foreign food; compare 5.1.2).



5.3.2 Electrogastrography

The following figures (5.1 and 5.2) are two examples of EGG recordings to demonstrate a normal pattern and arrhythmic tachygastria. They are not representative in that most recordings were less clear.

Each figure shows the EGG trace at top and a power spectrum at bottom. The power frequencies recorded were: 2.25-3.75 cpm (normal) and 4.5-9 cpm (tachygastria). Both power spectra show a large low frequency component, which can be ignored. The very high frequency component, seen as a jittery EGG trace, is contamination from the cardiac pulse.

Figure 5.1 shows a relatively normal EGG pattern (taken from a subject not used in the study reported in 3.5.2), with a slightly slow dominant frequency of 2.5 cpm. Subject 29 from the study, in comparison, shows tachygastria and arrhythmia in a recording taken immediately after vestibular stimulation, although the nearly flat trace towards the end is probably a loss of signal (figure 5.2). This subject had reported peak ratings of 2 for disorientation/dizziness and for sweating, but nothing for nausea or general malaise, immediately before the recording session.

Figure 5.1: EGG output showing normal response. [Figures not available on the internet yet.]

Figure 5.2: EGG output for Subject 29, second session. [Figures not available on the internet yet.]