Table 3.
Descriptive statistics, measures of internal consistency and goodness-of-fit indices for the 9 newly formed feeding practices scales – n = 462 Australian first-time mothers of 24-month-olds
| Factor | No. of items |
Unweighted composite scores |
Weighted composite scores |
Reliability |
Goodness-of-fit indices |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observed range | Mean (SD) | Observed range | Mean (SD) | Coefficient H | Cronbach’s α | χ2/df | RMSEA | CFI | TLI | ||
| Distrust in appetite |
4 |
1.00-4.25 |
2.33 (0.73) |
1.00-4.44 |
2.42 (0.75) |
0.72 |
0.63 |
4.26 |
.08 |
.98 |
.93 |
| Reward for behaviour |
6 |
1.00-4.33 |
1.70 (0.69) |
1.00-4.43 |
1.66 (0.68) |
0.89 |
0.86 |
3.26 |
.07 |
.99 |
.97 |
| Reward for eating |
6 |
1.00-4.83 |
1.67 (0.70) |
1.01-4.85 |
1.70 (0.74) |
0.91 |
0.89 |
3.29* |
.07 |
.99 |
.98 |
| Persuasive feeding |
6 |
1.00-4.50 |
2.52 (0.67) |
1.00-4.29 |
2.38 (0.68) |
0.76 |
0.73 |
2.02* |
.05 |
.98 |
.97 |
| Covert restriction |
4 |
1.00-5.00 |
3.19 (0.86) |
1.00-5.00 |
3.26 (0.91) |
0.84 |
0.80 |
2.79* |
.06 |
.99 |
.98 |
| Overt restriction |
4 |
1.00-5.00 |
3.38 (0.90) |
1.00-5.00 |
3.43 (0.90) |
0.62 |
0.61 |
1.57* |
.04 |
.99 |
.98 |
| Structured meal setting |
4 |
1.75-5.00 |
4.08 (0.67) |
1.63-5.00 |
4.05 (0.68) |
0.80 |
0.79 |
2.48 | .06 | .97 | .96 |
| Structured meal timing |
3 |
2.00-5.00 |
3.86 (0.60) |
1.94-5.00 |
3.90 (0.60) |
0.70 |
0.68 |
||||
| Family meal setting | 3 | 1.00-5.00 | 3.93 (1.09) | 1.00-4.95 | 3.88 (1.17) | 0.96 | 0.87 | ||||
Note: The possible range is 1 to 5 for each factor.
Goodness-of-fit for the ‘Structured Meal Setting’, ‘Structured Meal Timing’ and ‘Family Meal Setting’ factors was assessed simultaneously because of the low number of items for 2/3 of these congeneric models.
*The congeneric model was non-significant (i.e., p > 0.05), based on the Bollen-Stine bootstrapped chi-square.