Research AppraisalRandomised Controlled Trial

The effects of acute psychosocial stress on binge urges, inhibitory control, negative urgency and eating pathology in Binge Eating Disorder

NeuroscienceBrassard, S L, Punia, K, Laliberte, M et al.25 May 2026DOI

Clinical Snapshot

55CEBM
Evidence: ModerateRandomised Controlled Trial

PICO Framework

P — Population28 individuals with Binge Eating Disorder (BED)
I — InterventionAcute psychosocial stressor
C — ComparatorNo-stress control condition
O — OutcomesBinge urges, inhibitory control (Stop-Signal Task), mood disturbance, physiological stress biomarkers

Bottom Line

This small randomised trial (n=28) provides mechanistic insights into stress-binge relationships in BED, revealing that subjective stress responses, rather than physiological stress markers, drive increased binge urges and impaired inhibitory control. The dissociation between subjective and physiological stress responses suggests that interventions targeting stress perception and cognitive appraisal may be more effective than those focusing solely on physiological stress reduction. However, the very small sample size and lack of effect size reporting limit confidence in these findings. While the results support existing clinical approaches emphasising cognitive-behavioural interventions for BED, larger replication studies with more robust statistical reporting are needed before definitive clinical recommendations can be made. The findings align with current Australian treatment guidelines emphasising psychological interventions for eating disorders.

Evidence: Moderate

Key Findings

  • P Value: Significant (exact values not provided)

  • Effect Size: Not reported

  • Primary Outcome: Binge urges following acute psychosocial stress

  • Nnt Or Sensitivity: Not applicable - mechanistic study

  • Confidence Interval: Not reported

Clinical Application

High - stress management interventions are readily available and implementable in clinical practice Relevant to Australian practice; BED treatment through public mental health services and private psychology under Medicare Better Access scheme. Findings support psychological interventions targeting stress perception rather than just stress reduction Adults with diagnosed Binge Eating Disorder seeking treatment for stress-related binge episodes

Abstract

Stress is frequently reported as a trigger for binge episodes, yet it remains unclear how subjective and physiological stress responses interact with cognitive and affective mechanisms to increase binge eating risk. The present study investigated the effects of acute psychosocial stress on binge urges, focusing on the role of state- and trait-level vulnerabilities. Twenty-eight individuals with BED were randomized to either a Stress condition (n = 14) or No-Stress condition (n = 14). Following an acute psychosocial stressor, participants completed the Stop-Signal Task to behaviourally assess inhibitory control. Self-reported mood, binge urge ratings and saliva samples for stress biomarker detection were collected at three timepoints throughout the experimental session. Results demonstrated that acute psychosocial stress elicited marked increases in total mood disturbance, without corresponding physiological stress responses and significantly impaired inhibitory control. Notably, only subjective stress responses were associated with greater binge urges, whereas physiological stress responses were not. This dissociation highlights subjective stress reactivity as a clinically meaningful mechanism of risk in BED, underscoring the potential value of interventions that target stress perception and regulation to reduce binge eating vulnerability.

References

  1. 1.Brassard, S. L., Punia, K., Laliberte, M., Liu, H., Lucibello, K. M., Potter, S., & Balodis, I. M. (2026). The effects of acute psychosocial stress on binge urges, inhibitory control, negative urgency and eating pathology in Binge Eating Disorder. Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2026.03.024
Share:XLinkedIn

This content is for educational purposes for healthcare professionals only and does not constitute clinical advice. Clinical decisions should be based on individual patient assessment, current guidelines, and appropriate specialist consultation. Editorial Standards · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service