Development and initial validation of a self-report measure to assess eating disorder-specific interoceptive perception.

IF 3.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-16 DOI:10.1037/pas0001283
Julie Ortmann, Annika P C Lutz, Gitta Rose, Christian Happ, Claus Vögele, André Schulz, Zoé van Dyck
{"title":"Development and initial validation of a self-report measure to assess eating disorder-specific interoceptive perception.","authors":"Julie Ortmann, Annika P C Lutz, Gitta Rose, Christian Happ, Claus Vögele, André Schulz, Zoé van Dyck","doi":"10.1037/pas0001283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Interoceptive deficits-particularly with respect to the perception of emotions, hunger, and satiety-constitute important targets for intervention in eating disorders (EDs). Suitable self-report measures to identify these deficits, however, are lacking. We, therefore, developed and validated a multidimensional questionnaire to assess eating disorder-specific interoceptive perception (EDIP) in terms of the ability to perceive and discriminate between emotions, hunger, and satiety. In two independent samples with a total of 2058 individuals (22.74% with self-reported EDs), exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses revealed a four-factor solution of the EDIP Questionnaire (EDIP-Q) with the subscales Emotions, Hunger, Satiety, and Discrimination. The EDIP-Q has sound psychometric properties and was related to convergent questionnaires but unrelated to divergent self-report measures, supporting its construct validity. Participants with self-reported EDs had significantly lower EDIP-Q scores compared to participants without self-reported ED diagnosis. While individuals with self-reported anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), and binge-eating disorder (BED) report similar difficulties in perceiving emotions, participants with BN and BED report greater difficulties in perceiving satiety and differentiating between hunger and emotional states compared to participants with AN. In contrast, individuals with AN report higher sensibility to satiety but lower sensibility to hunger compared to individuals with BN and BED. The EDIP-Q is a valuable clinical tool to establish profiles of deficits in EDIP that provide the basis for developing more targeted treatment approaches for EDs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20770,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Assessment","volume":" ","pages":"162-174"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001283","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Interoceptive deficits-particularly with respect to the perception of emotions, hunger, and satiety-constitute important targets for intervention in eating disorders (EDs). Suitable self-report measures to identify these deficits, however, are lacking. We, therefore, developed and validated a multidimensional questionnaire to assess eating disorder-specific interoceptive perception (EDIP) in terms of the ability to perceive and discriminate between emotions, hunger, and satiety. In two independent samples with a total of 2058 individuals (22.74% with self-reported EDs), exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses revealed a four-factor solution of the EDIP Questionnaire (EDIP-Q) with the subscales Emotions, Hunger, Satiety, and Discrimination. The EDIP-Q has sound psychometric properties and was related to convergent questionnaires but unrelated to divergent self-report measures, supporting its construct validity. Participants with self-reported EDs had significantly lower EDIP-Q scores compared to participants without self-reported ED diagnosis. While individuals with self-reported anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), and binge-eating disorder (BED) report similar difficulties in perceiving emotions, participants with BN and BED report greater difficulties in perceiving satiety and differentiating between hunger and emotional states compared to participants with AN. In contrast, individuals with AN report higher sensibility to satiety but lower sensibility to hunger compared to individuals with BN and BED. The EDIP-Q is a valuable clinical tool to establish profiles of deficits in EDIP that provide the basis for developing more targeted treatment approaches for EDs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

开发和初步验证自我报告测量评估进食障碍特异性内感受性知觉。
内感受性缺陷——尤其是对情绪、饥饿和饱腹感的感知——构成了饮食失调(EDs)干预的重要目标。然而,目前还缺乏适当的自我报告措施来识别这些缺陷。因此,我们开发并验证了一份多维问卷,以评估饮食失调特异性内感受性知觉(EDIP)在感知和区分情绪、饥饿和饱腹感方面的能力。在两个独立样本中,共2058人(22.74%有自我报告的ed),探索性和验证性因子分析显示,EDIP问卷(EDIP- q)具有情绪、饥饿、饱腹和歧视四个分量表的四因子解。EDIP-Q具有良好的心理测量特性,与收敛性问卷相关,但与发散性自我报告测量无关,支持其结构效度。与没有自我报告ED诊断的参与者相比,自我报告ED诊断的参与者的EDIP-Q得分显着降低。虽然自我报告的神经性厌食症(AN)、神经性贪食症(BN)和暴食症(BED)的个体在感知情绪方面报告类似的困难,但与AN相比,BN和BED的参与者在感知饱腹感和区分饥饿和情绪状态方面报告的困难更大。相比之下,与BN和BED个体相比,AN个体对饱腹感的敏感性更高,而对饥饿的敏感性较低。EDIP- q是一个有价值的临床工具,可以建立EDIP缺陷的概况,为开发更有针对性的ed治疗方法提供基础。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychological Assessment
Psychological Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Psychological Assessment is concerned mainly with empirical research on measurement and evaluation relevant to the broad field of clinical psychology. Submissions are welcome in the areas of assessment processes and methods. Included are - clinical judgment and the application of decision-making models - paradigms derived from basic psychological research in cognition, personality–social psychology, and biological psychology - development, validation, and application of assessment instruments, observational methods, and interviews
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信