German version of the intuitive eating scale: Psychometric evaluation and application to an eating disordered population

Dyck, Zoé Van; Herbert, Beate M.; Happ, Christian; Kleveman, Gillian V.; Vögele, Claus

doi:10.1016/j.appet.2016.07.019

Cited by 55 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As previous studies on intuitive eating have used the Intuitive Eating Scale 2 (IES‐2; Tylka & Kroon Van Diest, 2013), a German translation of this scale (Van Dyck, Herbert, Happ, Kleveman, & Vögele, 2016) was included in the present study to examine construct validity of E‐PID. The IES‐2 consists of 23 items and four subscales: Eating for Physical Rather than Emotional Reasons, 8 items, example item ‘I find myself eating when I’m feeling emotional (e.g., anxious, depressed, sad), even when I’m not physically hungry’; Unconditional Permission to Eat, 6 items, example item ‘I try to avoid certain foods high in fat, carbohydrates, or calories’; Reliance on Hunger and Satiety Cues, 6 items, example item ‘I trust my body to tell me when to eat’; Body‐Food Choice Congruence, 3 items, example item ‘Most of the time, I desire to eat nutritious foods’.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preference for Intuition and Deliberation in Eating Decision‐making: Scale validation and associations with eating behaviour and health

König

Sproesser

Schupp

et al. 2020

British J Health Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives. Two distinct lines of research separately regard either deliberately regulated eating or intuitive eating as most beneficial for health. The present research aims to integrate these seemingly contradictory findings by investigating the relationships between Preference for Intuition and Deliberation in Eating Decision-making (E-PID) and subjective and objective health-related parameters using a newly developed scale. Design. Study 1: online survey; Study 2: cross-sectional community cohort sample. Methods. Study 1 (N = 699) assessed E-PID, intuitive, restrained, and external eating, motivation to eat healthily, domain-unspecific Preference for Intuition and Deliberation, and general self-control. Study 2 (N = 1,212) assessed E-PID, positive eating, intention to eat healthily, eating behaviour, and objective health risk factors (BMI, waist circumference, blood pressure, fasting serum glucose, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides). Results. Study 1 confirmed a two-factor structure and provided evidence for construct validity: A higher preference for intuition was positively related to intuitive eating, while a higher preference for deliberation was associated with increased dietary restraint. In Study 2, preference for deliberation was positively related to the intention to eat healthy, healthy eating behaviour, and health parameters. Preference for intuition was generally unrelated to health parameters, although a higher preference for intuition was related to a somewhat unhealthier eating pattern. Conclusions. Preference for intuition and deliberation when making food choices are two distinct decision-making styles: The former focuses on internal cues, while the latter focuses on cognitive regulation of food intake. Despite these differences, neither decision-making style was shown to be detrimental. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preference for Intuition and Deliberation in Eating Decision‐making: Scale validation and associations with eating behaviour and health

König

Sproesser

Schupp

et al. 2020

British J Health Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The 23 items are rated on a five-point scale and are summed up to a total score and four subscales (“Unconditional Permission to Eat”, “Eating for Physical Rather than Emotional Reasons”, “Reliance on Hunger and Satiety Cues”, and “Body-Food Choice Congruence”). Good internal consistencies of the total score (Cronbach Alpha 0.91 for females and 0.82 for males) and subscales (Cronbach Alphas >0.72) were reported [36]. The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale [37] is a standard measure for self-esteem, consisting of ten items rated on a five-point scale.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Usability and Engagement Evaluation of an Unguided Online Program for Promoting a Healthy Lifestyle and Reducing the Risk for Eating Disorders and Obesity in the School Setting

Nitsch¹,

Adamcik²,

Kuso³

et al. 2019

Nutrients

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implementing integrated online prevention to reduce the risk of both obesity and eating disorders, in the school setting, is a promising approach. The challenge is to develop highly user-friendly and motivating programs, to foster adherence and effectiveness. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the usability of such a universal prevention program for students aged 14–19 years, and to address engagement issues. A mixed-methods approach was chosen, consisting of a think-aloud task, a semi-structured interview, and a questionnaire including items on sociodemographic characteristics and the System Usability Scale (SUS). Usability tests were conducted in two rounds, with five adolescents participating per round. Mean score in the SUS was 92.5 of 100 points (range 85–100), in the second round, after some adaptations from the participants’ feedback. In the course of the think-aloud tasks and interviews, five major themes emerged—visual design, navigation, mode of transfer, content, and engagement conditions. Interesting headlines, gamification, and monitoring tools are crucial for engagement. Apart from the importance of using the program during school hours, the study showed that problems currently perceived as important by the target group, need to be considered and addressed, prior to offering them prevention programs, which highlights the importance of a user-centered design.

show abstract

“…Van Dyck, Herbert, Happ, Kleveman, & Vögele, 2016) assesses intuitive eating behavior (i.e. eating in response to physiological hunger and satiety cues) with 23 items.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“I will fast … tomorrow”: Intentions to restrict eating and actual restriction in daily life and their person-level predictors

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. Dietary restraint is a common, yet controversial practice to tackle overweight. Yet, despite good intentions to reduce food intake, most restraint-based diets fail to produce long term weight loss. A better understanding of the naturalistic course of daily dieting intentions and their effectiveness in guiding subsequent eating behavior are therefore needed. Method. In two studies, participants (n=49 and n=59) reported both their state intention to restrict eating on the next day, as well as their actual restriction on that day via smartphone-based evening reports of 12 and 10 days, respectively. Intention-behavior gap scores were calculated as differences between intention at t1 (e.g. evening intention Monday for restriction Tuesday) and restriction at t2 (evening report of actual restraint on Tuesday). Restriction-related trait questionnaires served as predictors of general intention or restriction level, whereas several traitlevel disinhibiting eating style questionnaires served as predictors for intention-behavior gaps (difference scores). Results. Daily intentions to restrict were rated higher than the daily actual restrictive behavior. Participants with higher scores on restriction-related questionnaires (restrained eating, dieting, reversed intuitive eating) showed higher levels of daily state intention and restriction. Larger state intention-behavior gaps, by contrast, were seen in participants scoring high on trait-level disinhibiting eating styles (emotional eating, stress eating and food craving). Discussion. The results point to potential risk factors of diet failure in everyday life: emotional, stress eating, and food craving are disinhibiting traits that seem to increase intention-behavior gaps. These findings can inform individualized weight-loss interventions: individuals with disinhibiting traits might need additional guidance to avoid potentially frustrating diet failures.

show abstract

German version of the intuitive eating scale: Psychometric evaluation and application to an eating disordered population

Cited by 55 publications

References 48 publications

Preference for Intuition and Deliberation in Eating Decision‐making: Scale validation and associations with eating behaviour and health

Preference for Intuition and Deliberation in Eating Decision‐making: Scale validation and associations with eating behaviour and health

Usability and Engagement Evaluation of an Unguided Online Program for Promoting a Healthy Lifestyle and Reducing the Risk for Eating Disorders and Obesity in the School Setting

“I will fast … tomorrow”: Intentions to restrict eating and actual restriction in daily life and their person-level predictors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About