The Questionnaire for Eating Disorder Diagnoses (Q-EDD) operationalizes eating disorder criteria of the 4th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and differentiates (a) between those with and without an eating disorder diagnosis, (b) among eating-disordered, symptomatic, and asymptomatic individuals, and (c) between those with anorexia and bulimia diagnoses. Three studies examined the Q-EDD's psychometric properties. Convergent validity was supported by correspondence between Q-EDD diagnoses and established inventory scores. Criterion validity was supported by high correspondence between Q-EDD and interview or clinician diagnoses. Incremental validity was supported by greater accuracy of Q-EDD diagnoses than those yielded by an established inventory. Test-retest reliability and interscorer agreement were very good. Future use is discussed.Studies concerning the prevalence, correlates, and epidemiology of eating disorders among women have proliferated in recent years, among both counseling psychologists and others. Unfortunately, there are important shortcomings in the ways in which eating disorders are operationalized in this literature, particularly when nonclinical samples such as college students and community women are examined. In these samples, eating-disordered women are selected for

The Eating Attitudes Test (EAT; Garner & Garfinkel, 1979) is one of the most widely used self-report eating disorder instruments. Originally developed to diagnose anorexia nervosa, it is often used in nonclinical samples where it has a high false-positive rate, which is likely due to changes in diagnostic criteria. Because the EAT has not been validated with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed. [DSM-IV]; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) criteria, we examined its criterion validity for discriminating between nonclinical women with and without an undifferentiated DSM-IV eating disorder diagnosis. We also examined differences in mean EAT scores among eating-disordered, symptomatic, and asymptomatic participants. Results show that the EAT has an accuracy rate of at least 90% when used to differentially diagnose those with and without eating disorders and that mean EAT scores differed among eating-disordered, symptomatic, and asymptomatic participants.

No abstract

In this article we discuss the importance of anticipating and addressing the emotional difficulties students experience in graduate-level courses on trauma and violence. Herman's (1997) model for treating survivors of trauma serves as a framework for recommendations for ameliorating secondary traumatic stress in the classroom; we draw on a variety of sources to suggest self-care strategies that students can use outside of the classroom. We also address the importance of self-care for instructors of classes on trauma and violence.

To test a hypothesis from self-efficacy theory, we randomly assigned 149 subjects to verbal or mathematics and success or failure conditions in which they attempted to solve easy or difficult anagram or number series tasks. Changes in task self-efficacy and task interest as a result of task success or failure were in accordance with predictions from self-efficacy theory. We also examined the generalizabilty of the effects of task performance. The results indicated that task performance effects generalized to self-efficacy and interest ratings on an irrelevant task and to global ratings of math and verbal ability. Task performance effects did not generalize to career self-efficacy and career interest measures but consistent gender differences in self-efficacy emerged as a result of both math and verbal task performance.