People with Sweet Tooths May Be Sweeter

Study subjects who expressed a preference for sweet over savory tastes also tended to be more agreeable. Karen Hopkin reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


With Halloween around the corner, parents are fretting over what all that candy will do to their little goblins. Well, it might just make them sweeter. Because people who prefer sugary snacks actually seem to be more kind. So says a study in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. [Brian Meier et al., "Sweet taste preferences and experiences predict prosocial inferences, personalities, and behaviors"]

We often describe personality or behavior with taste-related terms. Think of someone who’s bitter, or sour or maybe even a little picante. But do our tastes in food really reflect who we are?

Scientists looked for a link between a love of sweet things and the tendency to be generous or generally agreeable. College students answered a series of questions about their character—whether, for example, they’re soft-hearted or enjoy insulting people. Then they rated their liking for a variety of foods, from cake and ice cream to cranberries, sauerkraut and salsa. And it turns out that kids with a sweet tooth see themselves as sweet.

And maybe they are. Those that liked candy more than crackers were more likely to volunteer around campus or for additional studies. So if you’re looking to score a little milk of human kindness, try putting out a plate of cookies.

—Karen Hopkin

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe