A proposed distinction between normative and sensory external cues, and how it organises several other files in this corpus.
What the evidence says
- `cse13` ”introduce[s] a distinction between normative and sensory external cues”: normative cues (its example: portion size) ”refer to indicators of appropriate intake”, and sensory cues (its example: palatability) ”refer to the hedonic appeal of the food”. Plate size, serving norms, variety and aroma are this library’s further examples (marked 2026-09-19)[1]
- *The authors ”propose that normative cues affect everyone, whereas sensory cues, while affecting everyone, have a more powerful effect on some types of individuals (e.g., the obese) than on others”.* That is a proposal in a review, not a tested result[1]
- Sensory cues affect everyone too, on the proposal; the difference between people is one of degree. This refines Schachter’s proposal that obese individuals are ”especially (and perhaps exclusively)” responsive to external cues[1]
- Not verified: that the distinction sorts the post-Schachter literature (universal effects from normative cues, weight-related differences from sensory ones) is not in the abstract, and the full text is not held[1]
- This library’s application, not the paper’s: on the proposal, normative interventions such as smaller portions should work across people, while sensory interventions such as reducing palatability may matter more for some. Neither is tested in `cse13`[1]