Table 2.
Predictive Associations between Hormones and Dysregulated Eating.
| Model | b (SE) | t | df | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emotional Eating Scores | ||||
| Women without BEs (N=417) | ||||
| Main Effects: | ||||
| Intercept | −.02 (.01) | −2.07 | 193 | .04 |
| Estradiol | .03 (.02) | 1.45 | 327 | .15 |
| Progesterone | .03 (.02) | 1.52 | 327 | .13 |
| Negative Affect | .15 (.02) | 7.40 | 329 | <.001 |
| Body Mass Index (BMI) | .05 (.03) | 1.84 | 310 | .07 |
| Interactions: | ||||
| Intercept | −.03 (.01) | −2.10 | 135 | .04 |
| Estradiol | .03 (.02) | 1.60 | 327 | .11 |
| Progesterone | .03 (.02) | 1.34 | 327 | .18 |
| Estrogen x Progesterone | .02 (.01) | 1.61 | 304 | .10 |
| Negative Affect | .15 (.02) | 7.39 | 329 | <.001 |
| BMI | .05 (.03) | 1.64 | 310 | .10 |
| Women with BEs (N=28) | ||||
| Main Effects: | ||||
| Intercept | −.02 (.03) | −0.68 | 644 | .50 |
| Estradiol | −.08 (.04) | −2.23 | 619 | .03 |
| Progesterone | −.04 (.04) | −1.16 | 621 | .24 |
| Negative Affect | .31 (.04) | 8.79 | 645 | <.001 |
| Body Mass Index (BMI) | −.17 (.04) | −4.56 | 635 | <.001 |
| Interactions: | ||||
| Intercept | −.07 (.04) | −1.87 | 616 | .06 |
| Estradiol | −.06 (.04) | −1.62 | 606 | .10 |
| Progesterone | −.07 (.04) | −1.97 | 580 | .05 |
| Estrogen x Progesterone | .11 (.03) | 3.26 | 558 | .001 |
| Negative Affect | .31 (.03) | 8.85 | 632 | <.001 |
| BMI | −.16 (.04) | −4.40 | 620 | <.001 |
| Binge Frequencies | ||||
| Women with BEs (N=28) | ||||
| Main Effects: | ||||
| Intercept | .02 (.05) | 0.36 | 399 | .71 |
| Estradiol | −.20 (.05) | −3.95 | 391 | <.001 |
| Progesterone | .05 (.05) | 1.07 | 391 | .28 |
| Negative Affect | .20 (.05) | 4.09 | 398 | <.001 |
| Body Mass Index (BMI) | −.09 (.05) | −1.80 | 397 | .07 |
| Interactions: | ||||
| Intercept | −.05 (.05) | −0.92 | 381 | .36 |
| Estradiol | −.17 (.05) | −3.45 | 381 | .001 |
| Progesterone | .002 (.05) | 0.04 | 373 | .97 |
| Estrogen x Progesterone | .17 (.05) | 3.47 | 270 | .001 |
| Negative Affect | .20 (.05) | 4.15 | 391 | <.001 |
| BMI | −.08 (.05) | −1.63 | 388 | .10 |
Note. Differences in degrees of freedom (df) across subgroup analyses and dependent variables reflect differences in the samples examined. Lower df in the Women without BEs group resulted from the inclusion of correlated random intercepts and time-specific dyadic correlations to control for the non-independence of the twin data (see Methods). The number of twin pairs was low in the Women with BEs sample (N = 2 pairs) and thus, random intercepts and time-specific dyadic correlations were not included in the MLMs for these women. The lower df for binge frequencies in Women with BEs was due to the presence of some data collection days in which none of the women reported a binge episode.