You've probably heard the claim: People make more than 200 food decisions a day, most of them without even realizing it. But researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development say that number is more fiction than fact.
In a new article published in Appetite, researchers dissect the origins of the “200 decisions” myth and explain why it doesn’t hold up. The number came from a 2007 study in which participants were asked to estimate their daily eating decisions in two ways: first as a general guess, then broken down into subcategories like when, what, how much and with whom. The researchers multiplied those numbers across meals and snacks to reach a total of 226.7 decisions. The difference between the estimates was interpreted as evidence of unconscious or “mindless” choices.
But that interpretation, the new analysis argues, misrepresents how people actually think and eat. Lead author Maria Almudena Claassen and her colleagues say the original method likely inflated results due to something called the subadditivity effect, a well-documented cognitive bias that causes people to overestimate totals when breaking down a category into parts.
“Such a perception can undermine feelings of self-efficacy,” Claassen said. “Simplified messages like this distract from the fact that people are perfectly capable of making conscious and informed food decisions.”
Instead of relying on magic numbers, the authors argue for a more realistic, contextual approach to studying eating behavior. That includes tracking actual food choices in real life — what people eat, how much, when and in what social or emotional context. They advocate combining qualitative observations, digital tracking and diary methods to get a more accurate view of everyday decision-making.
They also point to “self-nudging” as a practical strategy to support better food choices. This means designing your environment to make healthy decisions easier, like keeping fruit visible and snacks tucked away.
“Magic numbers such as the alleged 200 food decisions do not tell us much about the psychology of eating decisions, even more so if these numbers turn out to be themselves distorted,” said co-author Ralph Hertwig, director at the Max Planck Institute.
This research was conducted at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development without any external grants or industry funding.