Development of the Weight- and Body-Related Shame and Guilt scale (WEB-SG) in a nonclinical sample of obese individuals

In this article, we present the evaluation of the psychometric properties of a new self-report measure of Weight- and Body-Related Shame and Guilt (WEB-SG). The main purpose of the study was to measure shame and guilt feelings separately in obese individuals and investigate differing behavioral and emotional correlates of these emotions. Altogether, 331 obese participants completed the WEB-SG and other established self-report measures. A subset of the participants completed a 6-month follow-up. The WEB-SG proved to be internally consistent and temporally stable over a 6-month period. Regarding the factorial structure, a two-factor conceptualization was supported. The construct validity of the WEB-SG subscales was evidenced by a substantial overlap of common variance with related measures. The subscales Shame and Guilt showed differential correlation patterns to other scales. The WEB-SG is a brief, psychometrically sound measure for assessing body shame and guilt concerning weight control in obese individuals.     

Causal attributions of obese men and women in genetic testing: Implications of genetic/biological attributions1

The present study sought to investigate genetic/biological attributions of obesity, their associations with a predisposition to obesity and their crossectional and longitudinal implications for weight regulation in obese individuals presenting for genetic testing and counselling. A total of 421 obese men and women underwent psychological and anthropometric assessment and a mutation screen of the melanocortin-4 receptor gene. At study entry, women revealed more genetic/biological attributions than men on the Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire adapted to obesity (86.2% versus 59.7%). Genetic/biological attributions of obesity were associated in both sexes with a family history of obesity, assessed through Stunkard's Figure Rating Scale. In both sexes, genetic/biological attributions were unrelated to weight regulation beliefs and behaviour (i.e. self-efficacy, controllability beliefs, restrained eating and physical activity), assessed through standardised questionnaires or interview at baseline and at six-month follow-up. In addition, causal attributions and weight regulation beliefs and behaviour were not predictive of body mass index at six-month follow-up. Overall, the results indicate that causal attributions of obesity to genetic/biological factors in obese individuals presenting for genetic screening and counselling are crossectionally and longitudinally unrelated to weight regulation and longer-term weight outcome. Those who attribute their obesity to genetic/biological factors likely have a familial obesity risk.     

Development of the Weight- and Body-Related Shame and Guilt Scale (WEB–SG) in a Nonclinical Sample of Obese Individuals

In this article, we present the evaluation of the psychometric properties of a new self-report measure of Weight- and Body-Related Shame and Guilt (WEB–SG). The main purpose of the study was to measure shame and guilt feelings separately in obese individuals and investigate differing behavioral and emotional correlates of these emotions. Altogether, 331 obese participants completed the WEB–SG and other established self-report measures. A subset of the participants completed a 6-month follow-up. The WEB–SG proved to be internally consistent and temporally stable over a 6-month period. Regarding the factorial structure, a two-factor conceptualization was supported. The construct validity of the WEB–SG subscales was evidenced by a substantial overlap of common variance with related measures. The subscales Shame and Guilt showed differential correlation patterns to other scales. The WEB–SG is a brief, psychometrically sound measure for assessing body shame and guilt concerning weight control in obese individuals.     

Parceling Cannot Reduce Factor Indeterminacy in Factor Analysis: A Research Note

Parceling—using composites of observed variables as indicators for a common factor—strengthens loadings, but reduces the number of indicators. Factor indeterminacy is reduced when there are many observed variables per factor, and when loadings and factor correlations are strong. It is proven that parceling cannot reduce factor indeterminacy. In special cases where the ratio of loading to residual variance is the same for all items included in each parcel, factor indeterminacy is unaffected by parceling. Otherwise, parceling worsens factor indeterminacy. While factor indeterminacy does not affect the parameter estimates, standard errors, or fit indices associated with a factor model, it does create uncertainty, which endangers valid inference.

     

Factor Indeterminacy as Metrological Uncertainty: Implications for Advancing Psychological Measurement

Researchers have long been aware of the mathematics of factor indeterminacy. Yet, while occasionally discussed, the phenomenon is mostly ignored. In metrology, the measurement discipline of the physical sciences, uncertainty – distinct from both random error (but encompassing it) and systematic error – is a crucial characteristic of any measurement. This research argues that factor indeterminacy is uncertainty. Factor indeterminacy fundamentally threatens the validity of psychometric measurement, because it blurs the linkage between a common factor and the conceptual variable that the factor represents. Acknowledging and quantifying factor indeterminacy is important for progress in reducing this component of uncertainty in measurement, and thus improving psychological measurement over time. Based on our elaborations, we offer a range of recommendations toward achieving this goal.