Reliability, Stability, and Factor Structure of the Bulimia Test–Revised and Eating Disorder Inventory–2 Scales in Adolescence

Abstract

The Eating Disorder Inventory-2 (EDI-2) and Bulimia Test-Revised (BULIT-R) have demonstrated strong reliability and validity in college students and adults. Although used in adolescent samples, little is known about the psychometric properties of these measures for adolescents. The reliability, factor structure, and mean levels of five EDI-2 scales and the BULIT-R were evaluated over 3 years. Data were collected yearly from two samples of adolescent females, one recruited from three public middle schools (n = 239, mean baseline age = 12.8) and one from two public high schools (n = 119, mean baseline age = 15.9). Results provide strong evidence for the reliability and stability of these measures. Mean levels of both measures appeared remarkably consistent over the 3 years. These results provide evidence of good psychometric performance for these scales in adolescence. The lack of change in these measures raises questions about the developmental trajectory of these variables through adolescence.

Readiness for change and short‐term outcomes of female adolescents in residential treatment for anorexia nervosa

“…51 Validity and reliability have been established for the EDI-2. [53][54][55] A cutoff score of 14 has been used to identify college women likely to possess a clinically diagnosable eating disorder. 51 Depression.…”

Body dissatisfaction, self-esteem, and overweight among inner-city Hispanic children and adolescents

“…For the area-specific scores (peer, school, and home self-esteem), the higher the score, the greater the self-esteem. Subjects and their parents also answered questions derived from validated surveys [12][13][14] about their perceived health status, eating habits, ability to make friends, family medical history, sociodemographics, acculturation, parental body perception, physical activity and sedentary behavior patterns. Physical assessments included height and weight measured on calibrated instruments.…”

A cross‐cultural comparison of the eating disorder inventory

“…22,23 The dimensionality and factor structure of the EDI-2 were not exhaustively documented in the Professional Manual. 15 Empirical support for an 8-factor (EDI) or 11-factor (EDI-2) structure has been either modest 18,24,25 or absent. 21,[26][27][28][29] There is also no support for a single underlying factor that could justify computation of the total score across all EDI-2 subscales and items.…”