The effects of the menstrual cycle on women’s novel food preferences: The mechanism of food shortage perception

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.0860

Abstract

Cite this article

JIN Chengwen, CHEN Rui, XU Ting. (2025). The effects of the menstrual cycle on women’s novel food preferences: The mechanism of food shortage perception. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 57(5), 860-882.

share this article

0
/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://journal.psych.ac.cn/acps/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.0860

https://journal.psych.ac.cn/acps/EN/Y2025/V57/I5/860

Figures/Tables 5

Table 1 Overview of methodology.

Study	Design	Measurement of IV	DV	Final sample	Main findings
S1A	Menstrual cycle: LP (FCD17~27) vs. FP (FCD6~14), between- subjects	FCM	British blood sausage vs. Harbin red sausage, real Choice	Café consumers (N = 84; M _age = 24.47, SD = 5.70)	Women in the LP chose novel foods more than those in the follicular phase.
S1B	Menstrual cycle: LP (FCD17~27) vs. EFP (FCD6~8) vs. OP (FCD9~14), between-subjects	FCM	British blood sausage vs. Harbin red sausage	Sojump ( N = 244; M _age = 31.81, SD = 5.40)	Women in the LP chose novel foods more and there was no significant difference between EFP and OP.
S1C	Menstrual cycle: Mid-luteal day (23^rd day) vs. ovulation day (14^th day), within-subjects	FCM and BCM	Preference for biryani, clean meat burgers	Students (N = 52; M _age = 21.00, SD = 1.88)	Women preferred the novel food on the mid-luteal day rather than their ovulation day.
S2	Estradiol, progesterone testing	Hormone detection in saliva	Three groups on food choices	Students (N = 65; M _age = 21.69, SD = 2.19)	Progesterone positively predicted the preference for novel foods, while Estradiol did not significantly predict it.
S3	2 (Menstrual cycle: LP (RCD2~13) vs. FP (RCD14~24)) × 2 (Food type: novel food vs. familiar food), between-subjects	BCM	Clean meat burger/Classic beef burger Preferences	Students (N = 112; M _age = 21.41, SD = 1.50)	For familiar foods, the preference effect of the menstrual cycle disappeared.
S4	LP (FCD16~27) vs. FP (FCD5~15), between-subjects	FCM	Clean meat burger vs. Classic beef burger	Credamo (N = 109; M _age = 28.93, SD = 5.88)	The mediating effect of perceived shortage of food was significant.
S5	2 (Menstrual cycle: LP (RCD2~13) vs. FP (RCD14~24)) × 2 (Shortage of food: shortage vs. control), between-subjects	BCM	Clean meat burger vs. Classic beef burger	Credamo (N = 173; M _age = 30.21, SD = 5.93)	For controls, novel foods were preferred during the LP; for women who activated the food shortage, the menstrual cycle difference in novel food preference disappeared.
S6	2 (Menstrual cycle: LP (FCD17~27) vs. FP (FCD6~14)) ×Continuous (food neophobia), between-subjects	FCM	Intention to taste sea worm jelly, oyster omelette and Shacha noodles	Tourists (N = 96; M _age = 33.21, SD = 6.95)	For women with low food neophobia, they preferred novel foods during the LP (vs. FP); for women with high food neophobia, there was no significant menstrual cycle differences in novel food preferences.
S7	2 (Menstrual cycle: LP (RCD2~13) vs. FP (RCD14~24)) × 2 (Food risk: salient vs. control), between-subjects	BCM	Preferences for Vietnamese insect food	Sojump (N = 268; M _age = 29.61, SD = 5.26)	For the control group, they had a higher preference for novel foods during the LP; for the salient food risk group, they had a lower preference for novel foods during the LP than during the FP.

Table 1 Overview of methodology.

Study	Design	Measurement of IV	DV	Final sample	Main findings
S1A	Menstrual cycle: LP (FCD17~27) vs. FP (FCD6~14), between- subjects	FCM	British blood sausage vs. Harbin red sausage, real Choice	Café consumers (N = 84; M _age = 24.47, SD = 5.70)	Women in the LP chose novel foods more than those in the follicular phase.
S1B	Menstrual cycle: LP (FCD17~27) vs. EFP (FCD6~8) vs. OP (FCD9~14), between-subjects	FCM	British blood sausage vs. Harbin red sausage	Sojump ( N = 244; M _age = 31.81, SD = 5.40)	Women in the LP chose novel foods more and there was no significant difference between EFP and OP.
S1C	Menstrual cycle: Mid-luteal day (23^rd day) vs. ovulation day (14^th day), within-subjects	FCM and BCM	Preference for biryani, clean meat burgers	Students (N = 52; M _age = 21.00, SD = 1.88)	Women preferred the novel food on the mid-luteal day rather than their ovulation day.
S2	Estradiol, progesterone testing	Hormone detection in saliva	Three groups on food choices	Students (N = 65; M _age = 21.69, SD = 2.19)	Progesterone positively predicted the preference for novel foods, while Estradiol did not significantly predict it.
S3	2 (Menstrual cycle: LP (RCD2~13) vs. FP (RCD14~24)) × 2 (Food type: novel food vs. familiar food), between-subjects	BCM	Clean meat burger/Classic beef burger Preferences	Students (N = 112; M _age = 21.41, SD = 1.50)	For familiar foods, the preference effect of the menstrual cycle disappeared.
S4	LP (FCD16~27) vs. FP (FCD5~15), between-subjects	FCM	Clean meat burger vs. Classic beef burger	Credamo (N = 109; M _age = 28.93, SD = 5.88)	The mediating effect of perceived shortage of food was significant.
S5	2 (Menstrual cycle: LP (RCD2~13) vs. FP (RCD14~24)) × 2 (Shortage of food: shortage vs. control), between-subjects	BCM	Clean meat burger vs. Classic beef burger	Credamo (N = 173; M _age = 30.21, SD = 5.93)	For controls, novel foods were preferred during the LP; for women who activated the food shortage, the menstrual cycle difference in novel food preference disappeared.
S6	2 (Menstrual cycle: LP (FCD17~27) vs. FP (FCD6~14)) ×Continuous (food neophobia), between-subjects	FCM	Intention to taste sea worm jelly, oyster omelette and Shacha noodles	Tourists (N = 96; M _age = 33.21, SD = 6.95)	For women with low food neophobia, they preferred novel foods during the LP (vs. FP); for women with high food neophobia, there was no significant menstrual cycle differences in novel food preferences.
S7	2 (Menstrual cycle: LP (RCD2~13) vs. FP (RCD14~24)) × 2 (Food risk: salient vs. control), between-subjects	BCM	Preferences for Vietnamese insect food	Sojump (N = 268; M _age = 29.61, SD = 5.26)	For the control group, they had a higher preference for novel foods during the LP; for the salient food risk group, they had a lower preference for novel foods during the LP than during the FP.

Figure 1. The mediating effect of food shortage perception (Study 4).
Notes: ^* indicates p < 0.05, ^aindicates a significant indirect effect.

Figure 1. The mediating effect of food shortage perception (Study 4).Notes: * indicates p < 0.05, a indicates a significant indirect effect.

Figure 2. The interaction effect of menstrual cycle and food shortage perception on novel foods preference (Study 5).

Figure 2. The interaction effect of menstrual cycle and food shortage perception on novel foods preference (Study 5).

Figure 3. The interaction effect of menstrual cycle and food neophobia on novel foods preference: A Johnson-Neyman analysis. (Study 6).

Figure 3. The interaction effect of menstrual cycle and food neophobia on novel foods preference: A Johnson-Neyman analysis. (Study 6).

Figure 4. The interaction effect of menstrual cycle and food risk on novel foods preference. (Study 7).

Figure 4. The interaction effect of menstrual cycle and food risk on novel foods preference. (Study 7).

References

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Comments

Abstract
Figures/Tables
References
Related Articles
Recommended Articles
Metrics
Comments

TOP