Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Apr 1.
Published in final edited form as: Obes Rev. 2017 Feb 6;18(4):412–449. doi: 10.1111/obr.12491

Table 2.

Summary of studies assessing the face validity of binge eating constructs

Reference Sample n % female Age BMI Procedure Summary of main findings
Adults
10 TS: family practice patients 243 100 26.6±5.5 NR Participants completed EDE and a subset defined binge eating in their own words 83% of EDE-defined OBE labeled as binges
42% of EDE-defined SBE labeled as binges
19% of EDE-defined OO labeled as binges
13% of EDE-defined SO labeled as binges
93% of participants required large amount of food to classify binge episodes
90% of participants required LOC to classify binge episodes

9 TS: bariatric surgery 197 100 39.8±11.2 43.0±6.7 Eating and Exercise Examination interview for quantity/quality of eating episodes LOC predicted self-reported binge eating (B=.16, t=5.19***)
Of women who self-reported binge eating: 75% reported associated LOC; 25% did not report associated LOC; 61% reported consuming ≥6 or more servings of food; 19% reported consuming 1–4 servings of food
Of women who self-reported overeating, 22% reported associated LOC but did not define episodes as binge eating

114 NTS: college students 99 76.8 25.5 NR Vignettes of a model eating varied according to quantity, duration, and LOC, and rated on binge scales Larger size [t(95)=340.05***] and LOC [t(98)=119.10***] predicted judgements of episodes as binges

14 NTS: community-based 48 100 38.9±11.4 34.6 Participants recorded type/amount of food and duration of eating episodes for 3 weeks; peer and dietitian judges rated randomly selected eating episodes as binges or non-binges Peer judges more likely than dietitians to label eating episodes as binges for participants with full- (z=4.61***) and subthreshold BED (z=3.09**)
Peer κ=.39
Dietitian κ=.44
Peer vs. dietitian κ=.40–.48
Participants vs. peer and dietitian κ=.07–.19

15 NTS: community-based with BED 23 95.7 44.7±10.9 NR Vignettes of a model eating varied according to quantity, duration, and LOC, and rated on binge scales Episodes involving a large quantity of food [F(1,80)=374.93**] or LOC [F(1,80)=109.90***] rated as more binge-like
Episodes rated as more binge-like if a large amount of food consumed when LOC was present [F(1,80)=3.95*]
Participants with BED rated vignettes involving large amounts of food higher on binge scale compared to undergraduates [F(2,80)=4.92**]
NTS: mental health professionals 34 50.0 30.2±2.2
NTS: college students 25 88.0 40.2±8.1

16 NTS: college students sample 1 238 70.0 20.2±3.0 22.3±3.7 Videotaped eating episodes varied according to model’s gender and quantity of food, and rated as binges/non-binges Larger size predicted judgements of episodes as binges [Wald χ2(1)=21.22***]
NTS: college students sample 2 139 66.0 19.8±2.8 22.4±3.0
NTS: college students sample 3 83 59.0 20.6±3.7 23.0±3.4

11 NTS: college students 969 64.0 Range=18–40+ NR Participants asked to define binge eating in their own words ~10–25% of participants endorsed LOC as necessary to define a binge; ~65–75% identified quantity of food consumed as necessary to define a binge
Individuals with BED identified LOC in defining a binge more frequently than those without BED [χ2(1)=6.57*]
Males and females with and without BED were similarly likely to identify quantity in defining a binge

8 NTS: community-based with BED 60 100 42.7±9.9 36.2±8.4 Participants asked to define binge eating in their own words and independent raters coded responses for presence/absence of binge features 82% of participants included LOC in binge eating definition
43% of participants included eating a large amount of food binge eating definition

Youth
12 NTS: school-based 259 41.7 14.7 NR Participants asked to define binge eating in their own words 72.2% of participants defined binge eating exclusively in terms of quantity of food eaten
12.9% of participants defined binge eating in terms of quantity, duration, and LOC

13 NTS: community-based adolescent/mother dyads 19 100 14.5±1.2 NR Focus groups with adolescents who reported LOC eating via phone screen Few participants directly endorsed LOC or binge eating
Binge eaters described as “lacking self control”
LOC associated with eating sneakily, negative affective antecedents, short-term relief

Abbreviations: BMI=body mass index (kg/m2); TS=treatment-seeking; NR=not reported; EDE=Eating Disorders Examination; OBE=objective binge eating; SBE=subjective binge eating; OO=objective overeating; SO=subjective overeating; LOC=loss of control; NTS=non-treatment seeking; BED=binge eating disorder

*

p≤.05

**

p<.01

***

p<.001