Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services

CNE Article 

Factor Structure of the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire in a Clinical Sample of Adult Women With Anorexia Nervosa

Kathryn E. Phillips, PhD, APRN; Karen M. Jennings, PhD, RN, PMHNP-BC; Matthew Gregas, PhD

Abstract

An exploratory factor analysis on the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q) is presented for a clinical sample of women with anorexia nervosa. THE EDE-Q was completed by 169 participants after admission to an inpatient unit for eating disorders. Results of the current study did not support the four-factor model presented by the EDE-Q. A new four-factor solution was obtained with two factors showing similarity to the Restraint and Eating Concern subscales of the original model. The Shape and Weight Concern items primarily loaded together on one factor, along with preoccupation with food and fear of losing control over eating, two Eating Concern items. Finally, an appearance factor was obtained that supports the results of prior research. [Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 56(5), 33–39.].

Abstract

An exploratory factor analysis on the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q) is presented for a clinical sample of women with anorexia nervosa. THE EDE-Q was completed by 169 participants after admission to an inpatient unit for eating disorders. Results of the current study did not support the four-factor model presented by the EDE-Q. A new four-factor solution was obtained with two factors showing similarity to the Restraint and Eating Concern subscales of the original model. The Shape and Weight Concern items primarily loaded together on one factor, along with preoccupation with food and fear of losing control over eating, two Eating Concern items. Finally, an appearance factor was obtained that supports the results of prior research. [Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 56(5), 33–39.].

Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a psychiatric disorder with an estimated lifetime prevalence of 0.6% (Hudson, Hiripi, Pope, & Kessler, 2007). According to the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013), diagnostic criteria for AN includes restriction of energy intake leading to low body weight, fear of gaining weight or being fat, and altered shape or body weight according to self-evaluation. Eating disorder screening tools are efficient and structured mechanisms to inform clinical decision making and monitor progress in treatment. Thus, reliability and validity of eating disorder screening tools is essential.

The Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q; Fairburn & Beglin, 1994, 2008) is a self-assessment of disordered eating behavior that is widely used and has been well validated (Fairburn & Beglin, 1994, 2008; Luce & Crowther, 1999). The EDE-Q is based on the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE), a clinical interview format used to evaluate eating pathology (Fairburn & Cooper, 1993; Fairburn, Cooper, & O'Connor, 2008). The EDE-Q consists of four subscales or factors; however, literature assessing the EDE-Q has raised objections about the four-factor structure, suggesting there may be an alternative number of factors or that items within each factor may be different than indicated by the EDE-Q (Aardoom, Dingemans, Slof Op't Landt, & Van Furth, 2012; Allen, Byrne, Lampard, Watson, & Fursland, 2011; Barnes, Prescott, & Muncer, 2012; Becker et al., 2010; Darcy, Hardy, Lock, Hill, & Peebles, 2013; Grilo, Henderson, Bell, & Crosby, 2013; Grilo, Reas, Hopwood, & Crosby, 2015; Hrabosky et al., 2008; Parker, Mitchell, O'Brien, & Brennan, 2016; Penelo, Negrete, Portell, & Raich, 2013; Peterson et al., 2007; White, Haycraft, Goodwin, & Meyer, 2014).

The EDE-Q contains four subscales: Eating Concern, Restraint, Shape Concern, and Weight Concern (Fairburn & Beglin, 2008). These subscales were derived from 22 items. The Eating Concern subscale contains five items designed to measure aspects of mental preoccupation with food, including eating location (private or social eating), loss of control when eating, fears about eating, and feelings of guilt related to eating. The Restraint subscale consists of five items that address concerns about food rules, eating and food avoidance, restraint, and the desire for an empty stomach. Eight items of the EDE-Q address Shape Concern, and include questions about shape dissatisfaction and significance of shape, desire for a flat stomach, discomfort with seeing or others seeing one's body, mental preoccupation with shape and weight, fears about gaining weight, and feelings of fatness. Finally, five items of the Weight Concern subscale address concerns related to body weight, including desire to lose weight, significance of weight, weight dissatisfaction, reaction to being weighed, and mental preoccupation with weight.

A handful of studies have assessed the factor structure of the EDE-Q in clinical populations (Aardoom et al., 2012; Allen et al., 2011; Barnes et al., 2012; Peterson et al., 2007). Peterson et al. (2007) were the first to propose a three-factor structure of the EDE-Q in an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using a community sample of women with bulimic symptoms. The first factor included the Shape and Weight Concern subscale items from the original EDE-Q loaded onto one factor (with the exception of the preoccupation with shape or weight item); the second factor contained the Eating Concern items from the original EDE-Q sub-scale, the preoccupation with shape or weight item, and the empty stomach item from the Restraint subscale; and the third factor contained the Restraint subscale items (with the exception of the empty stomach item) (Peterson et al., 2007). A more recent study by Barnes et al. (2012) found support for the three-factor model proposed by Peterson et al. (2007) in a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of 166 adults from universities and eating disorder charities in the United Kingdom. Alternatively, Aardoom et al. (2012) proposed a four-factor model identified from the EFA (Peterson et al., 2007) using 935 women seeking residential or outpatient treatment for eating disorders. However, there were similarities between correlations of items belonging to the same factor and items belonging to different factors, which the researchers argued indicates all items belong to one underlying dimension of eating disorder psychopathology. Similarly, Allen et al. (2011) conducted a CFA to compare the goodness-of-fit of five models of the EDE-Q across two female samples, one with 228 outpatients and the second with 211 university students with eating disorders. Results indicated that the best-fitting model was a one-factor model with eight items from the original Shape and Weight Concern subscales (Allen et al., 2011).

Despite the growing body of literature providing factor analysis on the EDE-Q, there is a paucity of research evaluating the factor structure using clinical samples of patients receiving inpatient treatment. Thus, the purpose of the current study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the EDE-Q among female adults with AN who were admitted to an inpatient treatment facility. EFA was performed on EDE-Q responses to determine whether the EDE-Q in the current sample yielded similar factors as the current version.

Method

Sample

Participants were women 18 years and older with AN who were admitted to an inpatient eating disorder unit in the Northeastern United States between January 2012 and December 2015. All patients met diagnostic criteria for AN based on either the fourth edition of the DSM (APA, 2000) or DSM-5 (APA, 2013). The DSM-5 was used exclusively for diagnostic criteria beginning October 1, 2015. A clinical interview conducted by a psychiatrist or psychiatric nurse practitioner determined the diagnosis of the eating disorder.

Procedure

Procedures were approved by the local institutional review board. Medical charts were reviewed to obtain data. Participants completed the EDE-Q (Fairburn & Beglin, 2008) within 24 hours of admission to the inpatient unit. Nursing staff supervised anthropometric measurements (i.e., height, weight), which occurred on calibrated scales with the patient wearing underwear and/or a hospital gown. Inspection and calibration of all anthropometric devices were completed according to the treatment facility's protocol.

Measures

The EDE-Q 6.0 (Fairburn & Beglin, 2008) is a 28-item measure with four subscales derived from the EDE. Twenty-two items measure severity; six items measure frequency of eating disorder behaviors (Fairburn & Cooper, 1993). The EDE-Q is scored using a 7-point Likert scale (0 to 6) with scores ≥4 indicating clinical range. Subscale and global scores reflect the severity of eating disorder psychopathology.

Statistical Analyses

Data are presented as mean (SD) scores on the demographic and clinical characteristics as well as the EDE-Q global and subscale scores. Cronbach's alpha (α) was used to assess internal consistency, with the standard being α ≥ 0.70 (Nunnally, 1978). EFA was performed using principal axis factoring with nonorthogonal Promax rotation. Item variability was assessed and showed sufficient variability based on estimates, standard deviations, and histograms. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (KMO) was used to determine factorability of the correlation matrices. The number of factors to retain and rotate was determined by examining scree plots and eigenvalues. All analyses were conducted using SPSS version 24.0. The statistical significance (alpha) level was set at p ≤ 0.05; all tests were two-tailed.

Results

Demographics and Clinical Characteristics

Participants (N = 169) had a mean age of 34.1 (SD = 13.7; range = 18 to 69). The mean body mass index (BMI) at time of admission was 15.87 kg/m2 (SD = 1.47; range = 12.23 to 18.48 kg/m2) and the mean BMI at time of discharge was 16.9 kg/m2 (SD = 1.48; range = 12.56 to 20.86 kg/m2). Average length of stay was 15.88 days (SD = 11.09; range = 2 to 58 days) and approximately one half of patients received prior treatment (49.1%; n = 84). The sample comprised participants who were predominately Caucasian (94.7%; n = 160); single, never married (63.7%; n = 107); and had at least some college education (65.4%; n = 104). Table 1 presents demographic and clinical characteristics based on AN subtypes. No group differences based on AN subtype were detected.

Demographics and Clinical Characteristics of Sample (N = 169)

Table 1:

Demographics and Clinical Characteristics of Sample (N = 169)

EDE-Q

Table 2 presents the mean EDE-Q global and subscale scores, standard deviations, and percentile ranks. Using the standard of α ≥ 4 as a marker of clinical significance, 56.8% of female adults (n = 96) scored in the clinically significant range on the Restraint subscale; 43.2% (n = 73) scored in the clinically significant range on the Eating Concern subscale; 63.3% (n = 107) scored in the clinically significant range on the Shape Concern subscale; 56.2% (n = 95) scored in the clinically significant range on the Weight Concern subscale; and 54.4% (n = 92) scored in the clinically significant range on the global scale. Table 3 indicates the mean EDE-Q subscale and global scores by eating disorder diagnoses.

Analysis of Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire Global and Subscale Scores (N = 169)

Table 2:

Analysis of Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire Global and Subscale Scores (N = 169)

Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire Global and Subscale Scores (N = 169)

Table 3:

Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire Global and Subscale Scores (N = 169)

Cronbach's α for the global and subscale scores were acceptable. Global score was α = 0.96; Restraint score was α = 0.89; Eating Concern score was α = 0.81; Shape Concern score was α = 0.90; and Weight Concern score was α = 0.84.

The KMO was 0.923, indicating that the correlation matrices were appropriate for analyses. Factor loadings provided support for the EDE-Q subscales (Table 4). Factor 1 included eight items from the Shape Concern, Weight Concern, and Eating Concern subscales that focused on preoccupation with and importance of body shape and weight, fear of weight gain and losing control of eating, and reaction to prescribed weighing. Factor 2 comprised three items from the Shape Concern subscale and the dissatisfaction with weight item from the Weight Concern subscale. Factor 3 included seven items, with five items from the Restraint subscale, one from the Weight Concern subscale (desire to lose weight), and one from the Shape Concern subscale (desire for a flat stomach). Factor 4 contained three items from the Eating Concern subscale. Overall, exploratory factors supported the Restraint and Eating Concern subscales. Most items from the Weight Concern and Shape Concern subscales separated into two factors: one factor tended to include items related to cognition or preoccupation with weight and shape; the other tended to include items related to appearance or dissatisfaction with weight and shape. Correlation among factors was moderate (r = 0.458 to 0.766; Table 5).

Principal Axis Analysis of Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q) Items

Table 4:

Principal Axis Analysis of Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q) Items

Factor Intercorrelations

Table 5:

Factor Intercorrelations

Discussion

The current study used EFA to examine the factor structure of the EDE-Q in a clinical sample of women with AN who were admitted to an in-patient treatment facility. In the current study, the four-factor solution did not fully support the original EDE-Q, which is similar to results of other EFA studies using clinical samples (Aardoom et al., 2012; Parker et al., 2016; Peterson et al., 2007). The extracted four factors accounted for 64.2% of total variance, and were based on eigenvalues >1 supported by the number of factors in the original EDE-Q. As in previous studies (Darcy et al., 2013; Peterson et al., 2007; White et al., 2014), two factors resembled the Restraint and Eating Concern subscales. However, the desire for a flat stomach item from the Shape Concern subscale and the desire to lose weight item from the Weight Concern subscale loaded with the Restraint subscale items. A third factor comprised items from the Shape and Weight Concern subscales, except for two items from the Eating Concern subscale (i.e., feelings of fatness; preoccupation with food, eating, or calories). A separate factor comprised three items from the Shape Concern subscale and one item from the Weight Concern subscale, and was similar to the factor referred to as Appearance Concern by Hrabosky et al. (2008). These findings suggest body image dissatisfaction or discomfort, or Appearance Concern, may be independent from other aspects of shape and weight concerns and preoccupation with weight and shape. Similar to Hrabosky et al. (2008), the current study supports the argument that measuring the overvaluing of and preoccupation with weight, shape, and general appearance-related concerns as separate, but related, constructs may be clinically useful.

In the current study, the items fear of losing control over eating and preoccupation with food, eating, or calories appear to be connected to the weight and shape construct. This finding may seem unsurprising for a sample of individuals with AN admitted to inpatient eating disorder treatment because the individuals may not make a distinction between weight and shape concerns; and fear of losing control over eating and preoccupation with food, eating, or calories. However, this finding is not consistent with previous community (Darcy et al., 2013; Peterson et al., 2007; White et al., 2014) and clinical (Aardoom et al., 2012; Allen et al., 2011) studies, and may reflect differences in the presentation of eating disorder symptoms in individuals with AN compared to those without.

Limitations

Although the study used a relatively large sample of women with AN who were admitted for inpatient eating disorder treatment, participants were women and predominately Caucasian, and the setting was a freestanding eating disorder treatment facility in the Northeastern United States, which may limit generalizability of findings. In addition, the four-factor structure was based on eigenvalues >1, and this method may yield too many factors with evidence from the scree plots suggesting fewer factors. Future research should attempt to replicate this proposed factor structure and test the original structure using non-clinical and clinical eating disorder samples across diagnosis, weight, and age groups.

Clinical Implications

Advanced practice psychiatric nurses who provide care to individuals with AN should use an eating disorder screening tool to assess and monitor symptom severity as well as inform clinical decision making. However, results of the current study indicate that female adults with AN may not differentiate between mental preoccupation with food and shape and fear of gaining weight and loss of control over eating. In other words, for female adults with AN, Shape and Weight Concern may include mental preoccupation with aspects of food and shape as well as fear about weight and eating control. Furthermore, only 43.2% to 63.3% of participants in this study scored in the clinically significant range on the EDE-Q subscales and 54.4% of individuals scored in the clinically significant range on the global score, despite the fact that all participants were diagnosed with AN and admitted to an inpatient eating disorder unit. These findings suggest that it may be necessary to consider other eating disorder screening tools to assess and monitor this clinical subpopulation. Moreover, advanced practice nurses should not depend on eating disorder screening tools alone, but should use screening tools in conjunction with clinical practice guidelines and clinical judgment to provide thorough and optimal care.

Conclusion

The EFA findings suggested a four-factor structure of the EDE-Q in a relatively large sample of women with AN, but did not fully support the original EDE-Q. Advanced practice psychiatric nurses should use an eating disorder screening tool in conjunction with clinical judgment and clinical practice guidelines to assess and monitor symptom severity and inform clinical decision making. Despite limitations of the current study, the results may facilitate better understanding of psychometric properties of the EDE-Q in clinical and community samples.

References

  • Aardoom, J.J., Dingemans, A.E., Slof Op't Landt, M.C. & Van Furth, E.F. (2012). Norms and discriminative validity of the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire. Eating Behaviors, 13, 305–309. doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2012.09.002 [CrossRef]
  • Allen, K.L., Byrne, S.M., Lampard, A., Watson, H. & Fursland, A. (2011). Comfirmatory factor analysis of the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire. Eating Behaviors, 12, 143–151. doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2011.01.005 [CrossRef]
  • American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
  • American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
  • Barnes, J., Prescott, T. & Muncer, S. (2012). Confirmatory factor analysis for the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire: Evidence supporting a three-factor model. Eating Behaviors, 13, 379–381. doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2012.05.001 [CrossRef]
  • Becker, A.E., Thomas, J.J., Bainivualiku, A., Richards, L., Navara, K., Roberts, A.L. & Striegel-Moore, R.H. (2010). Validity and reliability of a Fijian translation and adaptation of the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 43, 171–178. doi:10.1002/eat.20675 [CrossRef]
  • Darcy, A.M., Hardy, K.K., Lock, J., Hill, K.B. & Peebles, R. (2013). The Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire among university men and women at different levels of athleticism. Eating Behaviors, 14, 378–381. doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2013.04.002 [CrossRef]
  • Fairburn, C.G. & Beglin, S.J. (1994). Assessment of eating disorders: Interview or self-report questionnaire?International Journal of Eating Disorders, 16, 363–370.
  • Fairburn, C.G. & Beglin, S.J. (2008). Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q6.0). In Fairburn, C.G. (Ed.), Cognitive behavior therapy and eating disorders (pp. 309–313). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Fairburn, C.G. & Cooper, Z. (1993). The eating disorder examination (12th edition). In Fairburn, C.G. & Wilson, G.T. (Eds.), Binge eating: Nature, assessment, and treatment (pp. 317–360). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Fairburn, C.G., Cooper, Z. & O'Connor, M.E. (2008). Eating disorders examination. (edition 16.0D). In Fairburn, C.G. (Ed.), Cognitive behavior therapy and eating disorders (pp. 265–308). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Grilo, C.M., Henderson, K.E., Bell, R.L. & Crosby, R.D. (2013). Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire factor structure and construct validity in bariatric surgery candidates. Obesity Surgery, 23, 657–662. doi:10.1007/s11695-012-0840-8 [CrossRef]
  • Grilo, C.M., Reas, D.L., Hopwood, C.J. & Crosby, R.D. (2015). Factor structure and construct validity of the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire in college students: Further support for a modified brief version. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 48, 284–289. doi:10.1002/eat.22358 [CrossRef]
  • Hrabosky, J.I., White, M.A., Masheb, R.M., Rothschild, B.S., Burke-Martindale, C.H. & Grilo, C.M. (2008). Psychometric evaluation of the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire for bariatric surgery candidates. Obesity, 16, 763–769. doi:10.1038/oby.2008.3 [CrossRef]
  • Hudson, J.I., Hiripi, E., Pope, H.G. Jr.. & Kessler, R.C. (2007). The prevalence and correlates of eating disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Biological Psychiatry, 61, 348–358. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2006.03.040 [CrossRef]
  • Luce, K.H. & Crowther, J.H. (1999). The reliability of the Eating Disorder Examination-Self-Report Questionnaire version. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 25, 349–351. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-108X(199904)25:3<349::AID-EAT15>3.0.CO;2-M [CrossRef]
  • Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  • Parker, K., Mitchell, S., O'Brien, P. & Brennan, L. (2016). Psychometric evaluation of disordered eating measures in bariatric surgery candidates. Obesity Surgery, 26, 563–575. doi:10.1007/s11695-015-1780-x [CrossRef]
  • Penelo, E., Negrete, A., Portell, M. & Raich, R.M. (2013). Psychometric properties of the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire and norms for rural and urban adolescent males and females in Mexico. PLoS One, 8, 83245. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0083245 [CrossRef]
  • Peterson, C.B., Crosby, R.D., Wonderlich, S.A., Joiner, T., Crow, S.J., Mitchell, J.E. & le Grange, D. (2007). Psychometric properties of the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire: Factor structure and internal consistency. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 40, 386–389. doi:10.1002/eat.20373 [CrossRef]
  • White, H.J., Haycraft, E., Goodwin, H. & Meyer, C. (2014). Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire: Factor structure for adolescent girls and boys. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 47, 99–104. doi:10.1002/eat.22199 [CrossRef]

Demographics and Clinical Characteristics of Sample (N = 169)

CharacteristicAnorexia Nervosa Subtype, Mean (SD)tp
Restricting (n = 70)Binge-Eating/Purging (n = 99)
Age at time of admission (years)32.0 (13.2)35.5 (14.0)−1.6400.10
Weight at time of admission (kg)41.5 (5.3)42.1 (5.1)−0.7440.46
Weight at time of discharge (kg)44.3 (5.2)44.8 (4.9)−0.6200.54
Change in weight over time (kg/days)0.19 (0.16)0.19 (0.16)0.1050.92
Length of stay (days)16.5 (12.8)15.5 (9.7)0.5860.56

Analysis of Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire Global and Subscale Scores (N = 169)

ScoreRestraintEating ConcernShape ConcernWeight ConcernGlobal Score
Mean (SD)3.86 (2.01)3.39 (1.77)4.29 (1.71)3.97 (1.77)3.87 (1.66)
Percentile rank
  50.00.20.880.80.84
  100.80.61.631.21.23
  151.21.22.251.51.77
  201.61.62.502.22.00
  252.42.02.942.62.57
  302.62.63.503.23.03
  352.82.83.753.43.25
  403.63.04.133.63.52
  454.03.24.384.03.92
  504.43.64.754.44.34
  554.83.85.134.74.58
  605.04.25.384.84.77
  655.44.35.635.14.91
  705.64.65.755.45.14
  755.84.85.885.65.30
  806.05.06.005.85.50
  856.05.66.006.05.63
  906.06.06.006.05.82
  956.06.06.006.06.00
  99

Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire Global and Subscale Scores (N = 169)

ScaleAnorexia Nervosa Subtype, Mean (SD)tp
Restricting (n = 70)Binge-Eating/Purging (n = 99)
Restraint4.05 (1.72)3.73 (2.20)1.0410.29
Eating concern3.57 (1.63)3.26 (1.85)1.1140.27
Shape concern4.34 (1.64)4.25 (1.77)0.3320.74
Weight concern4.13 (1.68)3.85 (1.84)0.9880.33
Global4.02 (1.51)3.77 (1.76)0.9730.33

Principal Axis Analysis of Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q) Items

ItemEDE-Q SubscaleFactor 1Factor 2Factor 3Factor 4
Preoccupation with shape or weightShape/Weight Concern0.894−0.040−0.0170.004
Preoccupation with food, eating, or caloriesEating Concern0.852−0.049−0.1680.129
Fear of weight gainShape Concern0.756−0.1750.316−0.035
Fear of losing control over eatingEating Concern0.628−0.120−0.0030.273
Importance of shapeShape Concern0.6010.469−0.040−0.186
Importance of weightWeight Concern0.6010.3110.032−0.085
Feelings of fatnessShape Concern0.5180.1710.207−0.018
Reaction to prescribed weighingWeight Concern0.2310.1970.1350.120
Discomfort seeing bodyShape Concern0.0940.984−0.149−0.086
Dissatisfaction with shapeShape Concern−0.0640.8550.124−0.007
Avoidance of exposureShape Concern−0.0400.792−0.1010.195
Dissatisfaction with weightWeight Concern−0.2190.6750.3110.018
Avoidance of eatingRestraint−0.2790.0340.8980.119
Empty stomachRestraint0.187−0.0430.762−0.075
Flat stomachShape Concern0.402−0.0450.621−0.248
Food avoidanceRestraint0.1590.0880.5600.055
Restraint over eatingRestraint0.285−0.0080.5020.119
Desire to lose weightWeight Concern0.3390.1040.4260.092
Dietary rulesRestraint0.3130.0170.3830.178
Social eatingEating Concern0.2470.122−0.0910.641
Eating in secretEating Concern−0.048−0.0430.0730.633
Guilt about eatingEating Concern0.2230.1120.2250.321
Eigenvalue11.7061.6221.2081.010
Percent variance51.6746.1183.4782.949

Factor Intercorrelations

Factor 1Factor 2Factor 3Factor 4
Factor 11.0000.6630.7660.518
Factor 20.6631.0000.6050.458
Factor 30.7660.6051.0000.518
Factor 40.5180.4580.5181.000
Authors

Dr. Phillips is Assistant Professor, Fairfield University, Fairfield, Connecticut; Dr. Jennings is Postdoctoral Research Fellow, University of Chicago, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Neuroscience, and Adjunct Clinical Faculty, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois; and Dr. Gregas is Senior Research Statistician, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts.

The authors have disclosed no potential conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise. This research was supported in part by a Fairfield University, Faculty Summer Research Stipend.

Address correspondence to Kathryn E. Phillips, PhD, APRN, Assistant Professor, Fairfield University, 1073 N. Benson Road, Fairfield, CT 06825; e-mail: kphillips1@fairfield.edu.

Received: September 21, 2017
Accepted: December 07, 2017
Posted Online: January 12, 2018

10.3928/02793695-20180108-03

Sign up to receive

Journal E-contents