Nutrition: Positive reinforcement trumps fear

What is better, telling someone that they should eat their veggies because they’re good for them, or warning them of the menacing nature of junk food? A new study from Cornell University sought to answer that question by analyzing the efficacy of 43 international studies that focused on either positive or negative nutritional reinforcement.

Interestingly, what the researchers found was that the negative, “don’t eat this” message was most effective with those who already had extensive background knowledge, like doctors and dieticians. For the general population though, “do eat this” is a better strategy.

This knowledge is especially relevant for public health campaigns, as well as parents trying to develop healthy eating habits in their young children. Growing up with a strong sense of “good” foods is better than an emphasis on “bad” foods, which can sometimes lead to an unhealthy relationship fraught with guilt for eating “bad” foods. Yet, it seems our current social environment is more and more about restriction, with an increasing number of foods being added to the list of “bad” ingredients.

Focusing on the positive is a wise way to approach aspects of training beyond just nutrition. Most coaches will tell you that advice on how to improve is always better than focus on mistakes.

Many recovery and injury-prevention techniques get a bad reputation as things that we do only when something is hurting. Instead of making foam rolling or physiotherapy appointments something you do when you feel a twinge, make them a regular part of your schedule, a “good” instead of a “bad.”