Table 1.
Mean (± standard deviation) of sample characteristics in each study group.
Figure 1.
Schematic presentation of the free exploration paradigm (A) and the modified antisaccade paradigm (B).
Panel A: Each of the two stimuli (food vs. nonfood) had a height of 8.2 cm and a width of 12 cm and were located with the midmost corner 0.8 cm away from the centre of the screen. The position of the stimuli (upper vs. lower and left vs. right quadrant) was balanced. Panel B: The stimuli (food or nonfood) had a height of 8.7 cm and a width of 11.8 cm and were located 3.5 cm from the centre of the screen. The position of the stimuli (left vs. right) was randomised.
Figure 2.
The percentage of total gaze duration on food vs. nonfood stimuli.
Figures showing means and standard deviations. A significant stimulus main effect (p<.05) and a group × stimulus interaction with significant differences between BED+ and BED− and BED+ and NWC (both p<.05, marked as *) in planned contrasts were found. BED+, overweight or obese women with binge eating disorder; BED−, overweight or obese women without binge eating disorder; NWC, normal-weight control women.
Figure 3.
The percentage of first saccade errors (A) and the percentage of second saccade errors (B).
Figures showing means and standard deviations. Panel A: Significant group and stimulus main effects (both p<.05) were found with significant differences between BED+ and BED− and BED+ and NWC in planned contrasts for the group effect (both p<.05, marked as *). Panel B: A significant group × stimulus interaction (p<.05) was found with significant differences in planned contrasts between BED+ and BED− and BED+ and NWC (both p<.05, marked as *). BED+, overweight or obese women with binge eating disorder; BED− overweight or obese women without binge eating disorder; NWC, normal-weight control women.
Table 2.
Mean (± standard deviation) for the percentage of sequential errors.