Appetitive traits associated with higher and lower body mass index: evaluating the validity of the adult eating behaviour questionnaire in an Australian sample

Abstract

BackgroundThe aims of this study were to evaluate the factor structure of the newly developed Adult Eating Behaviour Questionnaire (AEBQ) (Hunot et al., Appetite 105:356-63, 2016) in an Australian sample, and examine associations between the four food approach and four food avoidance appetitive traits with body mass index (BMI).MethodsParticipants (N = 998) recruited between May and October 2016 via a university research participation scheme and online social network sites completed an online version of the AEBQ and self-reported demographic and anthropometric data. Of the sample, 84.8% were females, 29.6% had completed a university degree and the overall mean age was 24.32 years (SD = 8.32). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test three alternative factor structures (derived from issues raised in the original development study): the original 8 factor model, a 7 factor model with Food Responsiveness and Hunger scales combined, and a 7 factor model with the Hunger scale removed.ResultsThe CFA revealed that the original 8 factor model was a better fit to the data than the 7 factor model in which Food Responsiveness and Hunger scales were combined. However, while reliability estimates for 7 of the 8 scales were good (Cronbach’s α between 0.70-0.86), the reliability of the Hunger scale was modest (0.67) and dropping this factor resulted in a good fitting model. All food avoidance scales (except Food Fussiness) were negatively associated with body mass index (BMI) whereas Emotional Overeating was the only food approach scale positively associated with BMI.ConclusionsThe study supports the use of the AEBQ as a reliable and valid measure of food approach and avoidance appetitive traits in adults. Longitudinal studies that examine continuity and stability of appetitive traits across the lifespan will be facilitated by the addition of this measurement tool to the literature.

The Adult Eating Behaviour Questionnaire in a bariatric surgery‐seeking sample: Factor structure, convergent validity, and associations with BMI

“…The food approach scales showed excellent convergent validity with Section H. The food avoidance scales showed both divergent and convergent validity with Section H: Satiety responsiveness was most strongly negatively related to Overeating/impaired appetite, and Emotional undereating was only associated with Negative affect, measures of the scales' respective opposing traits. Food fussiness was not correlated with any of the Section H scales, consistent with its pattern of relationships with the other AEBQ subscales and with Mallan et al's () suggestion that Food fussiness is unique among food approach/avoidance traits, in that it measures food choice rather than caloric intake.…”

“…All eight factors showed adequate internal consistency (alphas > 0.70). Scale means were similar to those found in two previous published, general samples (see Mallan et al, ).…”

“…Emotional overeating, Emotional undereating, Slow eating, and Satiety responsiveness were each related to female gender, with small effect sizes. This is the first study to directly report on gender differences in endorsement of these traits in adults, although Mallan et al () also controlled for gender in their analyses. Higher endorsement of the food avoidant traits related to caloric intake might reflect greater social desirability of dieting or restrained eating in women, particularly those seeking treatment for obesity.…”

“…The AEBQ shares seven of the original CEBQ scales (excluding a scale measuring desire to drink and including a newly added scale measuring subjective hunger). In two validation samples, the AEBQ scales (with the exception of scales measuring hunger and picky/fussy eating) were correlated with BMI in the expected directions (Hunot et al, 2016;Mallan et al, 2017). The psychometric properties of the AEBQ have yet to be studied in adults with severe obesity.…”

Classifying and characterizing Chinese young adults reporting picky eating: A latent profile analysis

“…In the current study, the Chinese version of the AEBQ (He, Sun, et al, ) was used. Previous studies indicate that the both the English and Chinese versions of the AEBQ are psychometrically sound (He, Sun, et al, ; Hunot et al, ; Mallan et al, ; Zickgraf & Rigby, ). Consistent with prior research (Ellis, Galloway, et al, ; Tharner et al, ), the following subscales were used: Food Responsiveness, Enjoyment of Food, Satiety Responsiveness, Food Fussiness, and Slowness in Eating.…”