Article

Psychometric Properties of the Eating Disorder Inventory in Clinical and Nonclinical Populations in Taiwan.

National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Assessment (Impact Factor: 3.29). 11/2011; DOI: 10.1177/1073191111428761
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Objective. To examine psychometric properties and investigate factor structures of the Mandarin Chinese version of the Eating Disorder Inventory (C-EDI). Method. The Mandarin C-EDI and other self-administered questionnaires were completed by a group of female eating disorder (ED) patients (n = 551) and a group of female nursing students (n = 751). Internal consistency, and convergent and discriminant validities were evaluated. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to examine the construct validity of the Mandarin C-EDI. Results. The Mandarin C-EDI had good internal consistency and convergent and discriminant validities. With a few exceptions, the original clinically derived eight EDI subscales were clearly identified and the factorial validity of the first-order eight-factor structure and the second-order two-factor structure showed an acceptable degree of fit to our empirical data in clinical patients. Discussion. The findings suggest that the Mandarin C-EDI is a valid tool for clinical use in Taiwan.

1 Bookmark
 · 
276 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Insofar as the factor structure of the Eating Disorders Inventory (EDI) among nonclinical participants is unclear (despite very wide use), the present study addressed the factor structure of five EDI subscales (Drive for Thinness, Bulimia, Perfectionism, Interpersonal Distrust, and Maturity Fears). Relatively large samples of non-patient women who participated in a cohort study of behavior and diet in 1982 (N = 617) and 1992 (N = 545) completed the five EDI subscales. Results are the first to clearly support the intended factor structure of the EDI among nonclinical participants.
    International Journal of Eating Disorders 03/1998; 23(2):189-98. · 3.03 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of the present article was to reconsider several conclusions by Velicer and Jackson (1990a) in their review of issues that arise when comparing common factor analysis and principal component analysis. Specifically, the three conclusions by Velicer and Jackson that are considered in the present article are: (a) that common factor and principal component solutions are similar, (b) that differences between common factor and principal component solutions appear only when too many dimensions are extracted, and (c) that common factor and principal component parameters are equally generalizable. In contrast, Snook and Gorsuch (1989) argued recently that principal component analysis and common factor analysis led to different, dissimilar estimates of pattern loadings, terming the principal component loadings biased and the common factor loadings unbiased. In the present article, after replicating the Snook and Gorsuch results, an extension demonstrated that the difference between common factor and principal component pattern loadings is inversely related to the number of indicators per factor, not to the total number of observed variables in the analysis, countering claims by both Snook and Gorsuch and Velicer and Jackson. Considering the more general case of oblique factors, one concomitant of overrepresentation of pattern loadings is an underrepresentation of intercorrelations among dimensions represented by principal component analysis, whereas comparable values obtained using factor analysis are accurate. Differences in parameters deriving from principal component analysis and common factor analysis were explored in relation to several additional aspects of population data, such as variation in the level of communality of variables on a given factor and the moving of a variable from one battery of measures to another. The results suggest that principal component analysis should not be used if a researcher wishes to obtain parameters reflecting latent constructs or factors.
    Multivariate Behavioral Research 07/1993; 28(3):263-311. · 1.66 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To develop a reliable and valid psychiatric self-rating scale for use in medical practice, the authors modified Derogatis' Symptom Check List-90-R (SCL-90-R) and designed a shorter form, named Brief Symptom Rating Scale (BSRS). The BSRS comprises 50 items, which best reflect the original ten symptom dimensions and three indices of psychopathology from the SCL-90-R. The BSRS has been proven in different populations to have an excellent split-half reliability as well as good internal structure according to factor analysis. In addition, BSRS scores are highly correlated with the parental form SCL-90-R among medical populations for each symptom dimension and the three indices. The rate of accurate classification for BSRS between psychiatric and nonpsychiatric cases was 75.8%, with a sensitivity of 66.7% and a specificity of 86.7% by discriminant analysis based on 10 dimensional scores obtained from 1,638 subjects, randomly selected from the Psychiatric Outpatient Clinic, the Family Medicine Clinic and nonpsychiatric medical inpatients. Therefore, the BSRS is a satisfactory global measure and case-finding screening instrument for psychopathology in both psychiatric and nonpsychiatric medical settings.
    Journal of the Formosan Medical Association 01/1991; 89(12):1081-7. · 1.70 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
153 Downloads
Available from
May 29, 2014