Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The intuitive eating scale-2: re-evaluating its factor structure using a bifactor exploratory structural equation modelling framework

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Eating and Weight Disorders - Studies on Anorexia, Bulimia and Obesity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Previous studies examining the appropriateness of the 4-factor model of intuitive eating scale-2 (IES-2) scores have returned equivocal results, which may reflect methodological limitations in the way IES-2 scores are modelled. Here, we applied a bifactor-exploratory structural equation modelling (B-ESEM) framework to better understand IES-2 multidimensionality.

Methods

A total of 603 participants from the United States completed the IES-2, alongside measures of body appreciation, body acceptance from others, and self-esteem. Our analyses compared the fit of various hypothesised models of IES-2 scores.

Results

Models of IES-2 scores based on confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) uniformly showed poor fit. ESEM models showed superior fit to CFA representations and a B-ESEM model showed improved fit over higher-order CFA and B-CFA representations of IES-2 scores. The optimal model was a B-ESEM model that accounted for, through correlated uniqueness (CU), the methodological artefact introduced by negatively-worded IES-2 items. This B-ESEM-CU model was fully invariant across gender and showed adequate construct validity.

Conclusion

The B-ESEM-CU framework appears well-suited to understand the multidimensionality of IES-2 scores. A model of IES-2 scores that yields a reliable latent indicator of global intuitive eating while allowing for simultaneous consideration of additional specific factors will likely provide more accurate accounting of the nature and outcomes of intuitive eating.

Level of evidence

Level III, cohort study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Available on request.

References

  1. Tribole E, Resch E (2012) Intuitive eating: A recovery book for the chronic dieter, 2nd edn. St. Martin’s Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  2. Tylka TL, Calogero RM, Daníelsdóttir S (2020) Intuitive eating is connected to self-reported weight stability in community women and men. Eat Disord 28:256–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/10640266.2019.1580126

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Barad A, Cartledge A, Gemmill K, Misner NM, Santiago CE, Yavelow M, Langkamp-Henken B (2019) Associations between intuitive eating behaviors and fruit and vegetable intake among college students. J Nutr Edu Behav 51:758–762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2019.03.01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Christoph M, Hazzard VM, Järvelä-Reijonen E, Hoopers L, Larson N, Neumark-Sztainer D (2021) Intuitive eating is associated with higher fruit and vegetable intake among adults. Advance online publication, J Nutr Edu Behav. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2020.11.015

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Hazzard VM, Telke SE, Simone M, Anderson LM, Larson NI, Neumark-Sztainer D (2021) Intuitive eating longitudinally predicts better psychological health and lower use of disordered eating behaviors: Findings from EAT 2010–2018. Advance online publication, Eat Weight Disord. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40519-020-00852-4

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. van Dyke N, Drinkwater EJ (2014) Relationships between intuitive eating and health indicators: Literature review. Pub Health Nutr 17:1757–1766. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1368980013002139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Tylka TL, Kroon Van Diest AM (2013) The intuitive eating scale-2: Item refinement and psychometric evaluation with college women and men. J Counseling Psychol 60:137–153. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ruzanska U, Warschburger P (2017) Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Intuitive Eating-Scale-2 in a community sample. Appetite 117:126–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.06.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Carbonneau E, Carbonneau N, Lamarche B, Provencher V, Bégin C, Bradette-Laplante M, Lamerée C, Lemieux S (2016) Validation of a French-Canadian adaptation of the intuitive eating scale-2 for the adult population. Appetite 105:37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.05.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Khalsa AS, Stough CO, Garr K, Copeland KA, Kharofa RY, Woo JG (2019) Factor structure of the intuitive eating scale-2 among a low-income and racial minority population. Appetite 142:104390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.104390

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Swami V, Todd J, Zahari HS, Mohd Khatib NA, Toh EKL, Barron D (2020) Dimensional structure, psychometric properties, and sex and ethnic invariance of a Bahasa Malaysia (Malay) translation of the Intuitive Eating Scale (IES-2). Body Image 32:167–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.01.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vintilă M, Todd J, Goian C, Tudorel O, Barbat CA, Swami V (2020) The Romanian version of the Intuitive Eating Scale-2: Assessment of its psychometric properties and gender invariance in Romanian adults. Body Image 35:225–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.09.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Strodl E, Markey C, Aimé A, Rodgers RF, Dion J, LoCoco G, Gullo S, McCabe M et al (2020) A cross-country examination of emotional eating, restrained eating and intuitive eating: Measurement Invariance across eight countries. Body Image 35:245–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.09.013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Swami V, Maïano C, Todd J, Ghisi M, Cardi V, Bottesi G, Cerea S (2021) Dimensionality and psychometric properties of an Italian translation of the Intuitive Eating Scale-2 (IES-2): An assessment using a bifactor exploratory structural equation modelling framework. Appetite 166:105588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105588

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Marsh HW (1996) Positive and negative global self-esteem: A substantively meaningful distinction or artifactors? J Pers Soc Psychol 70:810–819. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.4.810

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Morin AJS, Myers ND, Lee SM (2020) Modern factor analytic techniques: Bifactors models, exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), and bifactor-ESEM. In: Tenenbaum G, Eklund RC (eds) Handbook of sport psychology, 4th edn. Wiley, London, pp 1044–1073. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119568124.ch51

  17. Gignac GE (2016) The higher-order model imposes a proportionality constraint: That is why the bifactor model tends to fit better. Intelligence 55:57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2016.01.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Marsh HW, Nagengast B, Morin AJS (2013) Measurement invariance of big-five factors over the life span: ESEM tests of gender, age, plasticity, maturity, and la dolce vita effects. Dev Psychol 49:1194–1218. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026913

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Morin AJS, Arens A, Marsh H (2016) A bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling framework for the identification of distinct sources of construct-relevant psychometric multidimensionality. Structur Equation Model 23:116–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.961800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Tylka TL, Wood-Barcalow NL (2015) The Body Appreciation Scale-2: Item refinement and psychometric evaluation. Body Image 12:53–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.09.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Swami V, Todd J, Stieger S, Furnham A, Horne G, Tylka TL (2021) Body acceptance by others: Refinement of the construct, and development and psychometric evaluation of a revise measure – the Body Acceptance by Others Scale-2. Body Image 36:238–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.11.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rosenberg M (1965) Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  23. Robins RW, Hendin HM, Trzesniewski KH (2001) Measuring global self-esteem: Construct validation of a single-item measure and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 27:151–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201272002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Muthén LK, Muthén B (2019) Mplus user’s guide. Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles

  25. Asparouhov T, Muthén B (2009) Exploratory structural equation modeling. Struct Equation Model 16:397–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/1075510903008204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Morin AJS, Arens A, Marsh H (2016) A bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling framework for the identification of distinct sources of construct-relevant psychometric multidimensionality. Struct Equation Model 23:116–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.961800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hu LT, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equation Model 6:1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Steiger JH (2007) Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling. Pers Indiv Diff 42:893–898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lai K, Green SB (2016) The problem with having two watches: Assessment of fit when RMSEA and CFI disagree. Multivariate Behav Res 51:220–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2015.1135306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nunnally JC (1978) Psychometric theory. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  31. Morin AJS, Moullec G, Maïano C, Layet L, Just J-L, Ninot G (2011) Psychometric properties of the center for epidemiologic studies depression scale (CES-D) in French clinical and nonclinical adults. Revue d’Épidémiologie et de Santé Publique 59:327–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respe.2011.03.061

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Chen FF (2007) Sensitivity of goodness of fit indices to lack of measurement invariance. Struct Equation Model 14:464–504. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1203_7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB (2002) Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct Equation Model 9:233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem0902_5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Cohen J (1992) A power primer. Psych Bull 112:155–159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Hawks S, Merrill RM, Madanat HN (2004) the intuitive eating scale: development and preliminary validation. Am J Health Educ 35:90–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/19325037.2004.10603615

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Psychology and Sport Science, Anglia Ruskin University, East Road, Cambridge, CB1 1PT, Cambridgeshire, UK

    Viren Swami

  2. Centre for Psychological Medicine, Perdana University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

    Viren Swami

  3. Cyberpsychology Laboratory and Department of Psychoeducation and Psychology, Université du Québec en Outaouais, Saint-Jérôme, Canada

    Christophe Maïano

  4. Department of Leadership and Organizational Behaviour, Norwegian Business School, Oslo, Norway

    Adrian Furnham

  5. Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK

    Charlotte Robinson

Authors
  1. Viren Swami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christophe Maïano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adrian Furnham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Charlotte Robinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Viren Swami.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None.

Ethics approval

School Research Ethics Panel, Anglia Ruskin University (PSY-S19-026).

Informed consent

All participants provided digital informed consent.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Swami, V., Maïano, C., Furnham, A. et al. The intuitive eating scale-2: re-evaluating its factor structure using a bifactor exploratory structural equation modelling framework. Eat Weight Disord 27, 1349–1357 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40519-021-01271-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40519-021-01271-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation