Sex: 50.1/49.9% M/F Percentage with children: 24.5 Percentage ever divorced: 13.0 Percentage with current gambling problem: 1.5 Percentage with at least one traffic ticket in last year: 8.0 Percentage arrested at least once: 21.5 Percentage arrested more than once: 10.3 Percentage with >$10,000 credit card debt: 7.9 30.65 percent subjects with BMI>30 (obese) 7.28 percent subjects with BMI>40 (extreme obesity)

[+]

Identified

The subscales of the TFEQ-R18 represent self-regulation (Cognitive Restraint) and failure to self-regulate (Uncontrolled Eating), as well as eating in response to emotional stimuli (Emotional Eating) (Karlsson, Persson, Sjöström, & Sullivan, 2000). These constructs have been associated with both cognitive components of self-regulation and health outcomes. For example, one study using an earlier form of the TFEQ found a relationship such that higher Disinhibition related to greater Reflection Impulsivity (i.e. acting before considering necessary information) and self-reported impulsivity, and Cognitive Restraint related greater ability to inhibit inappropriate actions (Leitch, Morgan, & Yeomans, 2013). In regards to health outcomes, both Disinhibition and Emotional Eating consistently predict a wide range of negative health outcomes, including higher BMI, unhealthy food choices (e.g., high sugar, high fat), consumption of energy-dense foods in response to stress, and disordered eating (e.g., binge eating disorder, bulimia nervosa) (Bryant, King, & Blundell, 2008; Konttinen et al, 2010; Oliver, Wardle, & Gibson, 2000). The relationship of Cognitive Restraint to health outcomes is less clear, although there is some suggestion that it predicts better outcomes in obese populations but worse outcomes amongst normal weight groups (Konttinen, Haukkala, Sarlio-Lähteenkorva, Silventoinen, & Jousilahti, 2009). Due to the potency of these constructs in predicting health behavior and health outcomes, successfully targeting and modifying them could bolster the efficiency and effectiveness of health interventions and contribute to sustained behavior change.

[+] PMCID, PUBMED ID, or CITATION

Text Citation: Bryant, E. J., King, N. A., & Blundell, J. E. (2008). Disinhibition: its effects on appetite and weight regulation. Obesity reviews, 9(5), 409-419.

Text Citation: Karlsson, J., Persson, L. O., Sjöström, L., & Sullivan, M. (2000). Psychometric properties and factor structure of the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ) in obese men and women. Results from the Swedish Obese Subjects (SOS) study. International journal of obesity, 24(12), 1715.

Text Citation: Konttinen, H., Haukkala, A., Sarlio-Lähteenkorva, S., Silventoinen, K., & Jousilahti, P. (2009). Eating styles, self-control and obesity indicators. The moderating role of obesity status and dieting history on restrained eating. Appetite, 53(1), 131-134.

Text Citation: Konttinen, H., Männistö, S., Sarlio-Lähteenkorva, S., Silventoinen, K., & Haukkala, A. (2010). Emotional eating, depressive symptoms and self-reported food consumption. A population-based study. Appetite, 54(3), 473-479.

Text Citation: Leitch, M. A., Morgan, M. J., & Yeomans, M. R. (2013). Different subtypes of impulsivity differentiate uncontrolled eating and dietary restraint. Appetite, 69, 54-63.

Text Citation: Oliver, G., Wardle, J., & Gibson, E. L. (2000). Stress and food choice: a laboratory study. Psychosomatic medicine, 62(6), 853-865.

Measured

The 18-item revision of the TFEQ (Karlsson, Persson, Sjöström, & Sullivan, 2000). was developed to reduce item number, evaluate construct validity, and optimize psychometric properties of the original version of the scale (Stunkard & Messick, 1985). Scale construction was conducted using a split-sample of 4,377 obese men and women ages 37-57, drawn from a larger study (Ns = 2193 and 2184) (Karlsson, Persson, Sjöström, & Sullivan, 2000). A high degree of overlap between two subscales from the original version (Disinhibition and Hunger) was evident, as was a new factor related to emotional eating. Therefore, three new subscales were created to account for this factor structure: (1) Cognitive Restraint, (2) Uncontrolled Eating, and (3) Emotional Eating. Multitrait/multi-item scaling tests showed high levels of item-scale convergent validity across the two, independent samples, rs > .45, and high levels of item-discriminant validity, rs < .40. Subscales were also reliable, αs > .76. The strongest correlation between subscales was for Uncontrolled Eating and Emotional Eating, r = .39. In support of construct validity, Emotional Eating was related to poor mood, anxiety, and depression.
The properties of the TFEQ-R18 were subsequently examined in a general (non-obese) sample of 520 adults and 234 teenagers/young adults (De Lauzon et al., 2004). Multitrait/multi-item scaling tests provided support for item-scale convergent validity (all but one item had rs > .40), and only one item did not pass the criterion for item-discriminant validity (i.e. had a higher correlation with a subscale it was not assigned to). Reliabilities were acceptable, αs > .78. In terms of construct validity, subscales predicted eating behavior, although associations were more common in the adult sample. In adults, Cognitive Restraint was related to consuming a healthier diet, such as greater intake of leafy greens and lower intake of sugar, Uncontrolled Eating was related to energy-dense food intake, and Emotional Eating was related to snacking. In teenagers and young adults, Cognitive Restraint predicted lower intake of energy-dense foods.

[+] PMCID, PUBMED ID, or CITATION

Text Citation: De Lauzon, B., Romon, M., Deschamps, V., Lafay, L., Borys, J. M., Karlsson, J., ... & Charles, M. A. (2004). The Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire-R18 is able to distinguish among different eating patterns in a general population. The Journal of nutrition, 134(9), 2372-2380.

Text Citation: Karlsson, J., Persson, L. O., Sjöström, L., & Sullivan, M. (2000). Psychometric properties and factor structure of the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ) in obese men and women. Results from the Swedish Obese Subjects (SOS) study. International journal of obesity, 24(12), 1715.

Text Citation: Stunkard, A. J., & Messick, S. (1985). The three-factor eating questionnaire to measure dietary restraint, disinhibition and hunger. Journal of psychosomatic research, 29(1), 71-83.

[+] Demographics

Sex: 50.1/49.9% M/F
Percentage with children: 24.5
Percentage ever divorced: 13.0
Percentage with current gambling problem: 1.5
Percentage with at least one traffic ticket in last year: 8.0
Percentage arrested at least once: 21.5
Percentage arrested more than once: 10.3
Percentage with >$10,000 credit card debt: 7.9
30.65 percent subjects with BMI>30 (obese)
7.28 percent subjects with BMI>40 (extreme obesity)

Influenced

This measure has not been influenced yet.

Validated

This measure has not been validated yet.

Access Measure

Additional Resources

Eating Survey Visit Link

SOBC Validation Process

The Science of Behavior Change (SOBC) program seeks to promote basic research on the initiation, personalization and maintenance of behavior change. By integrating work across disciplines, this effort will lead to an improved understanding of the underlying principles of behavior change. The SOBC program aims to implement a mechanisms-focused, experimental medicine approach to behavior change research and to develop the tools required to implement such an approach. The experimental medicine approach involves: identifying an intervention target, developing measures to permit verification of the target, engaging the target through experimentation or intervention, and testing the degree to which target engagement produces the desired behavior change.

Within the SOBC Measures Repository, researchers have access to measures of mechanistic targets that have been (or are in the processing of being) validated by SOBC Research Network Members and other experts in the field. The SOBC Validation Process includes three important stages of evaluation for each proposed measure: Identification, Measurement, and Influence.

The first stage of validation requires a measure to be Identified within the field; there must be theoretical support for the specific measure of the proposed mechanistic target or potential mechanism of behavior change. This evidence may include references for the proposed measure, or theoretical support for the construct that the proposed measure is intended to assess. The second stage of validation requires demonstration that the level and change in level of the chosen mechanistic target can be Measured with the proposed measure (assay). For example, if the proposed measure is a questionnaire, the score on the measure should indicate the activity of the target process, and it must have strong psychometric properties. The third stage of validation requires demonstration that the measure can be Influenced; there must be evidence that the measured target is malleable and responsive to manipulation. Evidence relating to each stage includes at least one peer-reviewed publication or original data presentation (if no peer-reviewed research is available to support the claim) and is evaluated by SOBC Research Network Members and experts in the field.

Once a measure has gone through these three stages, it will then either be Validated or Not validated according to SOBC Research Network standards. If a measure is Validated, then change in the measured target was reliably associated with Behavior Change. If a measure is Not validated, then change in the measured target was not reliably associated with Behavior Change. Why would we share measures that are not validated? The SOBC Research Network values open, rigorous, and transparent research. Our goal is to make meaningful progress and develop replicable and effective interventions in behavior change science. Therefore, the SOBC sees value in providing other researchers in the field with information regarding measures that work and measures that fall short for specific targets. Further, a measure that is not validated for one target in one population may be validated in another target or population.

Want to learn more? For any questions regarding the SOBC Validation Process or Measures Repository, please email info@scienceofbehaviorchange.org.

Identified

Has the mechanism been identified as a potential target for behavior change? This section summarizes theoretical support for the mechanism.

Measured

Have the psychometric properties of this measure been assessed? This section includes information such as content validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability.

Influenced

Has a study manipulation led to change in the mechanism? This section addresses evidence that this measure is modifiable by experimental manipulation or clinical intervention.

Not Validated

Has a change in this mechanism been associated with behavior change? This section addresses empirical evidence that causing change in the measure reliably produces subsequent behavior change.