The validation of short eating disorder, body dysmorphia, and Weight Bias Internalisation Scales among UK adults

Author:

Lantos Dorottya,Moreno-Agostino Darío,Harris Lasana T.,Ploubidis George,Haselden Lucy,Fitzsimons Emla

Abstract

Abstract Background When collecting data from human participants, it is often important to minimise the length of questionnaire-based measures. This makes it possible to ensure that the data collection is as engaging as possible, while it also reduces response burden, which may protect data quality. Brevity is especially important when assessing eating disorders and related phenomena, as minimising questions pertaining to shame-ridden, unpleasant experiences may in turn minimise any negative affect experienced whilst responding. Methods We relied on item response theory to shorten three eating disorder and body dysmorphia measures, while aiming to ensure that the information assessed by the scales remained as close to that assessed by the original scales as possible. We further tested measurement invariance, correlations among different versions of the same scales as well as different measures, and explored additional properties of each scale, including their internal consistency. Additionally, we explored the performance of the 3-item version of the modified Weight Bias Internalisation Scale and compared it to that of the 11-item version of the scale. Results We introduce a 5-item version of the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire, a 3-item version of the SCOFF questionnaire, and a 3-item version of the Dysmorphic Concern Questionnaire. The results revealed that, across a sample of UK adults (N = 987, ages 18–86, M = 45.21), the short scales had a reasonably good fit. Significant positive correlations between the longer and shorter versions of the scales and their significant positive, albeit somewhat weaker correlations to other, related measures support their convergent and discriminant validity. The results followed a similar pattern across the young adult subsample (N = 375, ages 18–39, M = 28.56). Conclusions These results indicate that the short forms of the tested scales may perform similarly to the full versions.

Funder

Economic and Social Research Council

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference57 articles.

1. Oates J, Carpenter D, Fisher M, Goodson S, Hannah, Kwiatkowski R, et al. BPS code of human research ethics. The British Psychological Society; 2021.

2. Rolstad S, Adler J, Rydén A. Response burden and questionnaire length: is shorter better? A review and Meta-analysis. Value Health. 2011;14(8):1101–8.

3. Fernández-Ballesteros R. Self-report questionnaires. In: Haynes SN, Heiby EM, editors. Comprehensive handbook of psychological assessment: vol 3 behavioural assessment. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2004. pp. 194–221.

4. Paulhus DL, Vazire S. The self-report method. Handbook of research methods in personality psychology. New York: Guilford; 2007. pp. 224–39.

5. Stanton JM, Sinar EF, Balzer WK, Smith PC, ISSUES AND STRATEGIES FOR REDUCING THE LENGTH OF SELF-REPORT SCALES. Pers Psychol. 2002;55(1):167–94.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3