Signing you in

That’s exactly what South Korea’s viral app FoodNeverComes offers. Part of a growing category of so-called “dopamine apps”, the platform recreates the experience of ordering food without actually processing an order. Despite offering no tangible reward, the app has found a devoted following among Gen Z users, raising an intriguing question: Why does pretending to order food feel satisfying?

According to Arpita Kohli, Psychologist & Counsellor at PSRI Hospital, the answer lies in how our brains process anticipation.

“The satisfaction is less from acquiring the food and more from the anticipation and the act of choosing. Scanning menus, comparing options and imagining a meal can temporarily satisfy curiosity, create a sense of control and provide a brief escape from stress or boredom,” says Kohli.

She explains that the app taps into three powerful psychological drivers: novelty, reward prediction and routine.

The term “dopamine app” suggests that these platforms exploit the brain’s reward chemical. While that is partly true, Kohli says the science is more nuanced.

“Dopamine isn’t released only when we receive a reward. It’s also deeply involved in expecting one. Activities such as scrolling through menus, clicking buttons and reaching the checkout screen can activate the brain’s reward pathways because they are associated with rewarding experiences.”

However, she cautions that expectation alone has its limits. “If the expected reward never arrives repeatedly, the brain gradually adapts through what’s known as prediction error. The excitement can diminish over time. So while the app may create a short-lived sense of satisfaction, it cannot replace the experience of actually receiving and eating the food.”

Kohli believes there may be some merit to this idea, but only in theory. “Like delaying gratification, simulating a purchase could help some people reduce impulsive food orders or unnecessary spending. But at present, there’s very little scientific evidence showing that these apps are effective behaviour-change tools.”

Instead, she warns that the opposite effect is equally plausible. “Frequent exposure to highly stimulating digital experiences may reinforce compulsive phone use and habitual reward-seeking. Whether these apps are helpful or harmful depends on how and why people use them. They should not be viewed as substitutes for evidence-based approaches to managing emotional eating or impulsive spending.”

For many young people, apps are no longer simply tools; they are environments where entertainment, emotional regulation and routine blend seamlessly into everyday life.

“These apps reflect a broader trend of seeking quick, low-effort stimulation in an increasingly digital world,” says Kohli. “For many Gen Z users, instant feedback, personalisation and constant novelty are woven into everyday life. Digital interactions aren’t separate from reality—they’re part of it.”

She adds that the app’s success demonstrates how much people value anticipation itself. “People often enjoy the expectation, entertainment and emotional regulation just as much as the final outcome. At the same time, it reminds us that app design is becoming increasingly sophisticated at capturing and holding our attention. Understanding its effects on habits, focus and wellbeing has never been more important.”