Food choice paradigms are commonly used to study decision mechanisms, individual differences, and intervention efficacy. Here, we measured behavior from twenty-three healthy young adults who completed five repetitions of a cued-attribute food choice paradigm over two weeks. This task includes cues prompting participants to explicitly consider the healthiness of the food items before making a selection, or to choose naturally based on whatever freely comes to mind. We found that the average patterns of food choices following both cue types and ratings about the palatability (i.e. taste) and healthiness of the food items were similar across all five repetitions. At the individual level, the test-retest reliability for choices in both conditions and healthiness ratings was excellent. However, test-retest reliability for taste ratings was only fair, suggesting that estimates about palatability may vary more from day to day for the same individual.