Table 2.
Pathways of the hypothesized and additional path models (N = 660)
| Path | β | 95% CI (Lower, Upper) | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hypothesized path model | |||
| Direct effect of LH strategy on AE | −0.15 | (− 0.23, − 0.06) | Significant |
| Indirect effect of LH strategy on AE via CHB | −0.06 | (− 0.10, − 0.03) | Significant |
| Indirect effect of LH strategy on AE via PRD | −0.16 | (− 0.20, − 0.11) | Significant |
| Additional path model | |||
| Direct effect of LH strategy on BMI | −0.002 | (− 0.09, 0.08) | Non-significant |
| Indirect effect of LH strategy on BMI via AE | −0.03 | (− 0.06, − 0.01) | Significant |
| Indirect effect of LH strategy on BMI via CHB | 0.01 | (− 0.004, 0.03) | Non-significant |
| Indirect effect of LH strategy on BMI via PRD | 0.01 | (− 0.03, 0.06) | Non-significant |
| Indirect effect of LH strategy on BMI via CHB and AE | −0.02 | (− 0.03, − 0.01) | Significant |
| Indirect effect of LH strategy on BMI via PRD and AE | −0.04 | (− 0.06, − 0.02) | Significant |
Note: LH = Life History; AE = Addiction-like Eating; CHB = Compensatory Health Beliefs; PRD = Personal Relative Deprivation