Department of Clinical Psychological Science, Faculty of Psychology & Neurosciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Int J Eat Disord. 2011 Mar;44(2):164-8. doi: 10.1002/eat.20799.
To test the construct validity and discriminative validity of the widely used Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire's (DEBQ) External Eating (EE) subscale.
After being exposed to food cues or not participants completed a bogus taste test. Subjective cue reactivity during food exposure and actual food intake after food exposure were measured.
EE scores were unrelated to food intake. A robust main effect of food cue exposure was found but contrary to what was predicted, low EE scorers ate more after food cue exposure than without whereas high EE scorers did not. The actual eating behavior of high and low scorers on the other DEBQ subscales - emotional and restrained eating - demonstrated that the EE also lacks discriminative validity.
The EE showed no predictive validity and no discriminative validity. The usefulness of the distinction of different types of concerned eaters is questioned.
测试广泛使用的荷兰饮食行为问卷(DEBQ)的外在进食(EE)分量表的结构效度和判别效度。
在暴露于食物线索或不暴露于食物线索后,参与者完成了一项虚假味觉测试。在食物暴露期间测量主观线索反应性,以及在食物暴露后的实际食物摄入量。
EE 分数与食物摄入量无关。食物线索暴露的主要影响是显著的,但与预期相反,低 EE 得分者在食物线索暴露后比没有暴露时吃得更多,而高 EE 得分者则没有。在其他 DEBQ 分量表(情绪性进食和约束性进食)上的高和低得分者的实际进食行为表明,EE 也缺乏判别效度。
EE 没有预测效度,也没有判别效度。不同类型的关注进食者的区分的有用性受到质疑。