Oregon Research Institute, Eugene, OR 97403, USA.
Appetite. 2010 Apr;54(2):331-9. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2009.12.009. Epub 2009 Dec 16.
Prospective studies find that individuals with elevated dietary restraint scores are at increased risk for bulimic symptom onset, yet experiments find that assignment to energy-deficit diet interventions reduce bulimic symptoms. One explanation for the conflicting findings is that the dietary restraint scales used in the former studies do not actually identify individuals who are restraining their caloric intake. Thus, we tested whether dietary restraint scales showed inverse relations to objectively measured caloric intake in three studies. Four dietary restraint scales did not correlate with doubly labeled water estimates of caloric intake over a 2-week period (M, r=.01). One scale showed a significant inverse correlation with objectively measured caloric intake during a regular meal ordered from an ecologically valid menu (M, r=-.30), but a significant positive relation that was qualified by a significant quadratic effect, to objectively measured caloric intake during multiple eating episodes in the lab (M, r=.32). In balance, results suggest that dietary restraint scales are not valid measures of dietary restriction, replicating findings from prior studies that examined objective measures of caloric intake.
前瞻性研究发现,饮食抑制评分较高的个体发生贪食症状的风险增加,但实验发现,能量限制饮食干预的分配可以减少贪食症状。对于这些相互矛盾的发现,有一种解释是,前研究中使用的饮食抑制量表实际上并不能识别出那些限制卡路里摄入的人。因此,我们在三项研究中测试了饮食抑制量表是否与客观测量的卡路里摄入量呈反向关系。四项饮食抑制量表与双标记水法估计的两周内的卡路里摄入量之间没有相关性(M,r=.01)。一个量表在从生态有效的菜单中订购的常规餐期间与客观测量的卡路里摄入量呈显著负相关(M,r=-.30),但在实验室的多次进食中与客观测量的卡路里摄入量呈显著正相关,这一关系受到显著二次效应的限制(M,r=.32)。综上所述,结果表明饮食抑制量表并不是衡量饮食限制的有效方法,这与之前研究客观测量卡路里摄入量的结果一致。