Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Appetite journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/appet Multi-method evidence for a dual-pathway perspective of self-regulation in loss of control over eating among adolescents Eva Van Malderen a,∗ , Lien Goossens a , Sandra Verbeken a , Eva Kemps b a Ghent University, Department of Developmental, Personality and Social Psychology, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000, Ghent, Belgium b School of Psychology, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia ARTICLE INFO Keywords: Adolescents Loss of control over eating Dual-pathway perspective Regulatory processes Reactive processes ABSTRACT Objective: Dual-pathway models propose that loss of control over eating (LOC) is the result of an imbalance between weaker regulatory and stronger reactive processes. However, these processes are generally captured with only one assessment method, leading to mixed findings. Additionally, it is unclear whether regulatory difficulties are generic or food-specific. Therefore, the aim of this study was twofold: (1) to investigate the interaction between regulatory and reactive processes in predicting the presence of LOC in adolescents, using both self-report questionnaires and behavioral tasks, and (2) to examine whether generic or food-specific reg- ulatory processes interact with reactive processes to predict the presence of LOC. Method: A community sample of 295 adolescents (10–17 years; 67.2% girls; M = 13 years; SD = 1.99) was allocated to a LOC-Group (n = 93) or a NoLOC-Group (n = 202) based on a self-report questionnaire which assessed whether participants had experienced LOC over the past month (Children's Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire). Both self-report questionnaires and behavioral tasks were used to measure regulatory (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function and go/no-go task, respectively) and reactive (Behavioral Activation Scale and dot probe task, respectively) processes. Some adolescents completed a generic go/no-go task and others a food-specific version. Binary logistic regressions were conducted with LOC as the categorical dependent variable and regulatory and reactive processes (and their interaction) as the independent variables. Results: In line with dual-pathway models, the combination of weaker regulatory and stronger reactive processes was associated with the presence of LOC. This was evident from both the self-report scales and the behavioral tasks. Preliminary results further suggest that regulatory difficulties seem to be food-specific. Conclusions: Our results provide multi-method evidence for the dual-pathway account of self-regulation in LOC among adolescents. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. 1. Introduction 1.1. Loss of control over eating Loss of control over eating (LOC), a key feature of binge eating, is defined as the experience of lack of control while eating. Recent pre- valence rates suggest that LOC is a common experience among ado- lescents (He, Cai, & Fan, 2016; Van Malderen, Goossens, Verbeken, & Kemps, 2018), and is associated with a wide range of physical (e.g., weight/fat gain, obesity) and psychosocial (e.g., depressive symptoms, low self-esteem) problems (Tanofsky-Kraff et al., 2011). Moreover, longitudinal research has shown that LOC in adolescents may be a precursor to clinical eating disorders (e.g., Bulimia Nervosa) or other types of psychopathology (e.g., depression, addiction) (Herpertz- Dahlmann et al., 2015). Driven by these adverse and long-term con- sequences, efforts have been made to examine LOC in youth; however, the explanatory mechanisms of this pathological eating behavior re- main to be fully understood (e.g., Goldschmidt et al., 2017; Van Malderen et al., 2018). 1.2. A dual-pathway perspective of self-regulation Self-regulation can be described as the adaptive regulation of one's emotions, cognitions and behavior (Nigg, 2017). Dual-pathway models (e.g., Strack & Deutsch, 2004) propose that adequate self-regulation is the result of two interacting processes: regulatory processes (e.g., in- hibitory control, working memory, cognitive flexibility) and reactive processes (e.g., attentional bias, reward responsiveness, approach- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.104729 Received 8 January 2020; Received in revised form 7 April 2020; Accepted 2 May 2020 ∗ Corresponding author. E-mail address: eva.vanmalderen@ugent.be (E. Van Malderen). Appetite 153 (2020) 104729 Available online 06 May 2020 0195-6663/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. T