We present a theory of normal eating, based on three fundamental elements: hunger, palatability, and norms of appropriateness. These three elements can account for food intake and choice, although not all three elements are equally important and they vary in terms of their importance in different situations. We suggest that various factors that are regarded as influential in food intake and choice (e.g., dieting, emotional arousal) may be understood in terms of our three basic elements. In this chapter, we present a theory of normal eating. There has been surprisingly little formal or theoretical attention paid to normal eating, perhaps because researchers (and people in general) assume that everyone already knows what normal eating is and how it works. A “negative” approach to the understanding of normal eating is evident in discussions of eating disorders, which are often seen as pathologies of normal eating but without specifying what normal eating is other than the default condition from which the pathologies deviate (Herman & Polivy, 1996). Researchers and people in general—when asked to explain why people (and they themselves) eat the way they do, why they choose (or reject) particular foods to eat, and why they eat as much (or as little) as they do on a given occasion—tend to fall back on two explanations, hunger and palatability (Vartanian et al., 2008). These explanations are taken for granted and rarely explored, because they are assumed to be self-evident. When given a choice of foods to eat, people (believe that they) choose the foods that they find most palatable. If given a choice among equally palatable foods, people may explain their choice in terms of hunger: a hungry person will often select the food that is higher in calories or at least perceived to be more satiating. In the absence of choice of food, people will typically explain why they ate a lot of the available food by claiming that they were particularly hungry or that the food was particularly palatable. Reduced intake is conversely attributed to low palatability or an absence of hunger (Vartanian et al., 2017). We have recently outlined a theory of normal eating (Herman, 2013; Herman et al., in press) in an attempt to provide a positive and comprehensive analysis of why people eat the way they do. This theory is not derived from the absence of disordered eating. It likewise does not assume that “everyone” already knows what normal eating is. Rather, it starts with the basic elements of normal eating and describes how they are related to each other and how they operate in particular eating situations. This theory is not self-evident. We hope to draw attention to aspects of eating that are generally taken for granted or overlooked altogether.

Normal Eating

工具书词条
发表日期：

2026年

查看全文

C. Peter Herman,
Janet Polivy,
Patricia Pliner

摘要

We present a theory of normal eating, based on three fundamental elements: hunger, palatability, and norms of appropriateness. These three elements can account for food intake and choice, although not all three elements are equally important and they vary in terms of their importance in different situations. We suggest that various factors that are regarded as influential in food intake and choice (e.g., dieting, emotional arousal) may be understood in terms of our three basic elements. In this chapter, we present a theory of normal eating. There has been surprisingly little formal or theoretical attention paid to normal eating, perhaps because researchers (and people in general) assume that everyone already knows what normal eating is and how it works. A “negative” approach to the understanding of normal eating is evident in discussions of eating disorders, which are often seen as pathologies of normal eating but without specifying what normal eating is other than the default condition from which the pathologies deviate (Herman & Polivy, 1996). Researchers and people in general—when asked to explain why people (and they themselves) eat the way they do, why they choose (or reject) particular foods to eat, and why they eat as much (or as little) as they do on a given occasion—tend to fall back on two explanations, hunger and palatability (Vartanian et al., 2008). These explanations are taken for granted and rarely explored, because they are assumed to be self-evident. When given a choice of foods to eat, people (believe that they) choose the foods that they find most palatable. If given a choice among equally palatable foods, people may explain their choice in terms of hunger: a hungry person will often select the food that is higher in calories or at least perceived to be more satiating. In the absence of choice of food, people will typically explain why they ate a lot of the available food by claiming that they were particularly hungry or that the food was particularly palatable. Reduced intake is conversely attributed to low palatability or an absence of hunger (Vartanian et al., 2017). We have recently outlined a theory of normal eating (Herman, 2013; Herman et al., in press) in an attempt to provide a positive and comprehensive analysis of why people eat the way they do. This theory is not derived from the absence of disordered eating. It likewise does not assume that “everyone” already knows what normal eating is. Rather, it starts with the basic elements of normal eating and describes how they are related to each other and how they operate in particular eating situations. This theory is not self-evident. We hope to draw attention to aspects of eating that are generally taken for granted or overlooked altogether.