Psychometric Properties of the Dutch Version of the Eating Disorder Inventory–3

The psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the Eating Disorder Inventory–3 (EDI-3) were tested in eating disordered patients ( N = 514) using confirmatory factor analyses, variance decomposition, reliabilities, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses. Factorial validity results supported the 12 subscales, but model fit was impaired by correlated item errors, misallocated items, and redundant subscales. At the composite level, the Bulimia subscale was identified as a largely specific source of information that did not contribute much to its overarching composite. Rel... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Lehmann, Vicky
Ouwens, Machteld A.
Braeken, Johan
Danner, Unna N.
van Elburg, Annemarie A.
Bekker, Marrie H. J.
Breurkens, Annette
van Strien, Tatjana
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2013
Reihe/Periodikum: SAGE Open ; volume 3, issue 4, page 215824401350841 ; ISSN 2158-2440 2158-2440
Verlag/Hrsg.: SAGE Publications
Schlagwörter: General Social Sciences / General Arts and Humanities
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-27063967
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2158244013508415

The psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the Eating Disorder Inventory–3 (EDI-3) were tested in eating disordered patients ( N = 514) using confirmatory factor analyses, variance decomposition, reliabilities, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses. Factorial validity results supported the 12 subscales, but model fit was impaired by correlated item errors, misallocated items, and redundant subscales. At the composite level, the Bulimia subscale was identified as a largely specific source of information that did not contribute much to its overarching composite. Reliabilities for subscales and composites ranged from .6 to .9. ROC curve analysis indicated good to excellent discriminative ability of the EDI-3 identifying clinical subjects against a reference group. In conclusion, further revisions of the EDI-3 might target the item allocation and (over-)differentiation of subscales and composites to further clarify its structure. For the clinical practice, we advise the careful use of the EDI-3, although it might serve as a good screening tool.