Wording carries a lot of weight!

Have you ever found yourself wanting something you can't have- seemingly only because you can't have it? Have you ever found yourself eating more food than you wanted after being denied it - maybe because you wanted to take back control over your own decisions? If so, then you are not alone.

People want to see themselves as being in charge of their own decisions and behavior. Threats to their freedom of choice can motivate them to restore their sense of freedom and self-determination by acting against the rule as soon as possible. This is why having a coach or spouse be the food rule enforcer can lead to eating in secret. This may seem innocuous or silly to some, but for the person who is secretly rebelling it can be quite a guilt trip and feel shameful.

This is a phenomenon called "psychological reactance"- reacting to a rule (that infringes on your freedom of choice) by breaking the rule to feel back in control of making decisions. One obvious problem with this phenomenon is that setting restrictions or rules can backfire and actually increase the unhealthy habit. So what are health professionals and campaigns to do when advocating for healthy lifestyle changes!?

Due to reactance, dietitians and other health professionals have had to change their tone and way in which they give advice in order to connect with clients and better meet their needs. Long gone are the days when clients needed information on the topic at hand and many of them are coming to sessions having already researched what they want to know. Our role had morphed into more of a facilitator or coach to help keep the client motivated to make the changes they want to make. Recent research suggests that this more "gentle" approach is not only what the client may want but what they need to make changes.

The reactance phenomenon was recently studied and you can read the article here. The researchers looked at the difference between making eating-related rules as suggestions versus restrictions.
So, for example, stating 'you should not eat unhealthy food' versus stating 'it is best not to eat unhealthy food, but ultimately the decision is up to you'. See the graphic to the left for more examples.

Results of this study indicate that "ironically enough, a restrictive rule may actually increase intake of food in situations where the rule is no longer in place or cannot be enforced". The explanation they gave was that a restrictive rule evoked psychological reactance and participants ate more of the unhealthy food once the rule was no longer enforced.

They also examined if both ways of giving advice are effective in discouraging unhealthy behavior. Some professionals believe that a more flexible and gentle approach won't push the client enough to make changes and follow rules. This study showed that both kinds of statements were equally able to discourage the unhealthy behavior. Therefore a suggested, more gentle rule does not minimize the problem behavior and may ultimately be a more practical alternative to a restrictive rule.

A great summary was written by the researchers: "a suggested rule still discourages consumption of a certain food, but it leaves the ultimate decision about eating the food up to the individual".

SO next time you feel yourself rebelling against a rule- you may be catching yourself in the act of psychological reactance. Take a step backwards and try rephrasing the advice you were given to be more of a suggestion than a rule.

Learn how to CONTROL what you eat with this simple strategy

Having food rules, diet rules and food restrictions are sadly becoming the norm nowadays. So common, in fact, that it can be hard to even identify the ones you follow. This is especially true if you have been following them for a long time.
Food rules can be about what or what not to eat. For example, "I am not allowed to eat chocolate because it is bad". They can be about restricting the time you can eat. For example "I am not allowed to eat past 7pm". They can be about how much to eat. For example "If I eat more than 1 slice of bread per day, I will gain weight".
Clients often describe using rules a means of controlling of their weight or body. Often they feel that if they give up these rules they will lose control, overeat or eat an unhealthy food. This may sound like it makes sense, but in reality, having "control" over something involves having choices. Funny enough, having many food rules or restrictions actually takes away your choices. If I want to have control over what I watch on my TV, I must have the remote and have access to a few channels. Same goes for my food and health- I must have food choices in order to really be able to chose what/when/how I eat.
Following rules forces you to listen to external factors rather than your body's signals (internal ones) to decide when, how much and what to eat. Our bodies have evolved to have built in mechanisms that will signal when it requires energy and when it has had enough. This is a scary concept for some people because they feel they cannot trust these signals, and there is some truth to these fears. If you have stopped listening to your body's hunger and satiety signals for a long time, they can be hard to hear. Also, if you are following a restrictive diet or are very preoccupied with food, the fact you are not eating enough can push you to overeat. Breaking free of food rules and restrictions can actually help you hear you understand your body's signals and experience fewer episodes of overeating.
Replacing erroneous food rules and myths with healthy guidelines (that are flexible and realistic) can be one step in the right direction. One simple way to do this: take a peek at the food guide. It has realistic guidelines and tells you exactly what your body needs to be healthy.
The facts is, avoiding certain foods does not automatically make you a healthier person, or a better person. Fun foods can be included from time to time in a way that is enjoyable and has no negative effects to your health or weight.