Meta-analyses suggest inhibitory control training (ICT) may be effective for reducing food intake. However, psychological research has come under scrutiny for lack of reliability. Selective reporting (only reporting significant results) is one factor contributing to the lack of reliability in published research. Therefore, estimates of food-related ICT effects may be inaccurate. We conducted p-curve analyses to assess the presence of selective reporting, evidential value, average effect size, and power in the food-related ICT literature. Extracted p-values were selected from articles included in food-related ICT meta-analyses and an updated literature search. Four p-curve analyses resulted in ‘U’-shaped distributions, suggesting evidence for both a true underlying effect and selective reporting in the food-related ICT literature. Robust analyses suggested the evidence for an underlying effect was primarily driven by the smallest p-value. The average effect size from included studies was small (d = 0.04 to 0.25). Average power to detect this effect was also small (7% to 18%). Results suggest no clear support for or against a true effect for food-related ICT. Low average effect size and power across studies suggests estimated effects are likely inflated in published literature. Higher-powered, pre-registered, longitudinal food-related ICT studies are needed to test for the presence and magnitude of ICT effects.

荟萃分析表明，抑制性控制训练 (ICT) 可能对减少食物摄入有效。然而，心理学研究因缺乏可靠性而受到审查。选择性报告（仅报​​告重要结果）是导致已发表研究缺乏可靠性的因素之一。因此，对食品相关 ICT 影响的估计可能不准确。我们进行了p曲线分析，以评估食品相关 ICT 文献中选择性报告、证据价值、平均效应大小和权力的存在。提取的p值选自与食品相关的 ICT 荟萃分析和更新的文献检索中的文章。四点曲线分析得出“U”形分布，表明食品相关 ICT 文献中存在真正的潜在影响和选择性报告的证据。稳健的分析表明，潜在影响的证据主要是由最小的p值驱动的。纳入研究的平均效应量很小（d  = 0.04 至 0.25）。检测这种效应的平均功率也很小（7% 到 18%）。结果表明，没有明确支持或反对食品相关 ICT 的真正影响。跨研究的低平均效应大小和功效表明，已发表文献中估计的效应可能被夸大了。需要更高功率、预先注册的纵向食品相关 ICT 研究来测试 ICT 影响的存在和程度。