Bongers Peggy, Jansen Anita
Eating Disorders and Obesity, Clinical Psychological Science, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University Maastricht, Netherlands.
Front Psychol. 2016 Dec 8;7:1932. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01932. eCollection 2016.
In eating research, it is common practice to group people into different eater types, such as emotional, external and restrained eaters. This categorization is generally based on scores on self-report questionnaires. However, recent studies have started to raise questions about the validity of such questionnaires. In the realm of emotional eating, a considerable number of studies, both in the lab and in naturalistic settings, fail to demonstrate increased food intake in emotional situations in self-described emotional eaters. The current paper provides a review of experimental and naturalistic studies investigating the relationships between self-reported emotional eater status, mood, and food consumption. It is concluded that emotional eating scales lack predictive and discriminative validity; they cannot be assumed to measure accurately what they intend to measure, namely increased food intake in response to negative emotions. The review is followed by a discussion of alternative interpretations of emotional eating scores that have been suggested in the past few years, i.e., concerned eating, uncontrolled eating, a tendency to attribute overeating to negative affect, and cue-reactive eating.
在饮食研究中，将人们分为不同的饮食类型是常见的做法，比如情绪化进食者、外部驱动型进食者和节制型进食者。这种分类通常基于自我报告问卷的得分。然而，最近的研究开始对这类问卷的有效性提出质疑。在情绪化进食领域，大量在实验室和自然环境中的研究都未能证明自我描述为情绪化进食者在情绪状态下会增加食物摄入量。本文对研究自我报告的情绪化进食者状态、情绪和食物消费之间关系的实验性和自然环境研究进行了综述。结论是，情绪化进食量表缺乏预测效度和区分效度；不能假定它们能准确测量其想要测量的内容，即因负面情绪而增加的食物摄入量。综述之后讨论了过去几年中对情绪化进食得分的其他解释，即关注性进食、无节制进食、将暴饮暴食归因于负面影响的倾向以及线索反应性进食。
