Final PPT Robles

8/9/2019 Final PPT Robles

1/23

Delma S. Robles

De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde


2/23

y Semi-structured interview

y Self-report questionnaire


3/23

y Cooper & Fairburn (1987) Eating DisorderExamination (EDE) interview measures specific

psychopathology of eating disorders including shapeand weight

y Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q)

y Questionnaire version of the full length EDEinterview; same 4 subscales: restraint, eating concern,shape concern and weight concern


4/23

y Garner (1995) Eating Disorder Inventory (EDI)measures attitudes, feelings and behaviors common to

anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa

y Herman & Polivy (1980) Restraint Scale measuresweight fluctuation and subjective concern for dieting


5/23

Comparative StudiesSemi-structured interview

y Wilson and Smith (1989)- better in assessment of bulimia nervosa

y Pyle, Halvorson, Newman & Mitchell (1986)

- more accurate on identification of binge eating andfear of loss of control over eating behaviors


6/23

y Carter, Aime, & Mills (2001)

- showed higher scores in measuring binge and

vomiting frequencies

y Tanofsky-Kraff, Morgan, Yanovski, Marmarosh,Wilfley & Yanovski (2003)

- more accurate results


7/23

Self-report questionnaire

y Fairburn & Beglin (1994)-generated higher scores in the assessment bingeeating and body shape concerns

y Wilfley, Schwartz, Spurrell & Fairburn (1997)

y - showed greater levels of disturbance


8/23

y Black & Wilson (1998)

- more efficient in identifying eating disorder

symptomsy Wolk, Loeb, & Walsh (2005)

- generates higher frequencies in assessing bingeeating and other featues such as vomiting and laxativeuse

y Field, Taylor, Celio & Colditz (2004)

- more substantial results in assessment of bulimicbehaviors among adolescents


9/23

y Fairburn, C. G., Walsh, T. B. & Sysko, R. (2005)

y EDE and EDE-Q yield similar assessments of eating

disorder symptoms and change in symptoms afterintervention


10/23

Objective of the Studyy To develop and validate a brief self-report

questionnaire that assesses the presence of eating

disorder symptoms and disordered eating patterns ofcollege women


11/23

Participantsy 258 female college students

yAge range 15 to 26 (mean age 18.42)

y Mean height 53; Mean weight 118.89y Filipino 244; Chinese 6; Japanese 3;

y Filipino-American 2; American 1;

y Korean 1; Filipino-German - 1


12/23

MeasuresEating Attitudes Test (EAT26)

3 Subscales

y Dieting (13 items)y Bullimia and Food Preoccupation (6 items)

y Oral Control (7 items)


13/23

Eating Behavior Checklist

4 Subscales

y Self Starvation (5 items)y Food Restraint (6 items)

y Eating Concern (3 items)

y Bulimic Behaviors (4 items)


14/23

Procedurey EB Checklist and EAT26 were administered

individually and in small groups


15/23

Data AnalysisDescriptive statistics (subscales)

y Convergent validity

y Discriminant validity

Confirmatory Factor Analysis


16/23

Results

Table 1 N M SD

Cronbachs

alpha SS FR EC BB Diet BFD OC

Eating Behavior

Checlist

Self-Starvation 258 1.79 1.12 0.8 ---

Food Restraint 258 1.63 0.78 0.65 .55** ---

EatingConcerns 258 1.29 0.78 0.23 .43** .33** ---

Bulimic

Behaviors 258 0.31 0.53 0.58 .55** .41**

.27*

* ---

EAT 26

Diet 258 0.53 0.55 0.86 .71** .54**

.57*

*

.57*

* ---

Bulimia/Food

Preoccupation 258 0.18 0.34 0.71 .45** .32**

.43*

*

.45*

* .62** ---

Oral Control 258 0.43 0.47 0.64 .25** .45**

.23*

*

.30*

* .43** .45** ---


17/23

M M t-value df PEat large amount of

food Yes No

_Self-Starvation 1.97 1.68 2.07* 256 0.04

_Food Restraint 1.69 1.59 0.99 256 0.32

_Eating Concerns 1.57 1.12 4.72** 256 0.00

_Bulimic

Behaviors 0.36 0.28 1.21 256 0.23 _Diet 0.61 0.49 1.75 256 0.08

_Bulimia/Food

Preoccupation 0.25 0.14 2.57** 256 0.01

_OC 0.42 0.43 -0.20 256 0.84

Engaged in Binge

Eating Yes No

Self-Starvation 2.03 1.69 2.26* 256 0.02

_Food Restraint 1.76 1.58 1.71 256 0.09

_Eating Concerns 1.62 1.15 4.66** 256 0.00

_Bulimic

Behaviors 0.42 0.26 2.23* 256 0.03

_Diet 0.70 0.46 3.28** 256 0.00

Bulimia/Food

Preoccupation 0.26 0.15 2.56** 256 0.01

Oral Control 0.48 0.41 1.15 256 0.25

Discriminant Validity of the EB Checklist and EAT26


18/23

Force Vomited Yes No

_Self-Starvation 2.72 1.70 4.33** 256 0.00

_Food Restraint 2.17 1.58 3.52** 256 0.00

_Eating Concerns 1.41 1.28 0.72 256 0.47

_Bulimic

Behaviors 1.15 0.23 9.11** 256 0.00

_Diet 1.06 0.48 5.04** 256 0.00

_Bulimia/FoodPreoccupation 0.41 0.16 3.51** 256 0.00

_Oral Control 0.64 0.41 2.25* 256 0.03

Pills/Laxatives Yes No

_Self-Starvation 2.75 1.67 5.16** 256 0.00

_Food Restraint 2.14 1.57 3.85** 256 0.00

_Eating Concerns 1.56 1.26 1.99* 256 0.04

_Bulimic

Behaviors 0.80 0.25 5.58** 256 0.00

_Diet 0.89 0.49 3.84** 256 0.00

_Bulimia/Food

Preoccupation 0.19 0.18 0.14 256 0.89

_Oral Control 0.51 0.42 0.99 256 0.32


19/23

Treated for

Eating Disorder Yes No

_Self-Starvation 2.30 1.75 1.90 256 0.06

_Food Restraint 1.85 1.62 1.18 256 0.24

_Eating Concerns 1.40 1.29 0.54 256 0.59

_Bulimic

Behaviors 0.52 0.29 1.61 256 0.11

_Diet 0.84 0.51 2.31* 256 0.02

_Bulimia/Food

Preoccupation 0.28 0.17 1.22 256 0.22

_Oral Control 0.50 0.43 0.61 256 0.54Attempted

Suicide Yes No

_Self-Starvation 2.13 1.75 1.55 256 0.12

_Food Restraint 1.92 1.60 1.94* 256 0.04

_Eating Concerns 1.26 1.30 -0.20 256 0.84

_Bulimic

Behaviors 0.52 0.29 2.06* 256 0.04

_Diet 0.63 0.52 0.95 256 0.34

_Bulimia/Food

Preoccupation 0.19 0.18 0.20 256 0.84

_Oral Control 0.46 0.43 0.31 256 0.76

*p


20/23

Findingsy Those who starve themselves adopt bulimic behaviors

and eat large amount of food when sad or depressed

y

Those who engage in binge eating have less controlover food intake

y Those who force vomit to lose weight are notpreoccupied with food


21/23

y Those who take pills and laxatives exhibit less bulimicbehaviors

y

Those who were treated for eating disorder engage indieting

y Those who divulged that they have thought orattempted suicide were found to have bulimic

behaviors and restrained food intake


22/23

y Descriptive statistics showed that the EB Checklistmeasured the factors that it purports to evaluate

y

Confirmatory Factor Analysis supports the constructvalidity of the two instruments.

y low internal consistencies of the subscales were foundin the EB Checklist, as influenced by the small number

of items for each subscale


23/23

Research Implicationsy how far most young womens self-esteem is attached

to their body weight, shape and size and what dieting

or weight loss techniques they employ that mayadversely affect their health

yways of coping with the pressure of media or society inachieving the ideal figure

y

how disordered eating patterns may lead these youngwomen to other self-destructive behaviors likedrinking, smoking or self-injury

Date post:	29-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	pemea2008
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

Final PPT Robles

Documents