1. Background
Methods
Results
Discussion
Drexel University
Tinashe M.Tapera, Stephanie P. Goldstein BS, BrittneyC. Evans BS,
Evan Forman PhD
Does Ecological Momentary Assessment Data Reflect Baseline
Self-Report inWeight LossTreatment?
Contact:Tinashe M.Tapera, tmt85@drexel.edu
• Disordered eating behaviors are predicted by questionnaires
such as theThree Factor EatingQuestionnaire (TFEQ).
• Participants’ responses to weight loss (WL) treatment studies
can be predicted at baseline usingTFEQ scores.
• The advent of smartphone technology has enabled more
efficient and accurate collection of self-report data through
EMA:
• Dietary lapses can be recorded in real time;
• Participants can describe the external and internal
factors that trigger the lapse in diet.
• Triggers can be compared with predicted behaviors.
• Traditional self-report measures of eating behavior may not be
as accurate as real-world and real-time measurement.
• TFEQ was administered to 12 participants (BMI=27-45 kg/m2,
age=18-57) at the beginning of a WL study involving smartphone
use (Diet Alert SmartphoneApp).
• TFEQ was administered to n=12, BMI=27-45 kg/m2, age=18-57
participants at the beginning of aWL study involving
smartphone use (Diet Alert SmartphoneApp).
• Participants’TFEQ was scored on 3 subscales:
• Cognitive restraint (conscious restriction of intake)
• Internal disinhibition (sensitivity to internal eating
triggers)
• External disinhibition (sensitivity to external eating
triggers)
• TFEQ subscales were dichotomized along the median values,
and participants grouped into low and high scoring subscale
groups.
• Participants collected 6 weeks of EMA data via mobile app,
recording triggers and their causes.
• Groups’ means for each trigger were statistically compared
using SPSS to observe which groups more frequently reported
triggers.
• Low restraint group triggers (boredom, feeling they
deserve it, low motivation) are coherent with low
cognitive restraint.
• High external disinhibition group frequently reported
negative thoughts, an internal trigger.
• Mixed results indicate that baseline measurements may
not be accurate predictors of dietary behavior due to:
• Bias and misinterpretation on the part of the
participant
• Attribution bias of dietary lapse trigger
conditions.
• Future research should apply more vigorous statistical
modeling approaches such as cluster analyses to further
investigate discrepancies.
Aim: Statistically compare reported triggers in EMA against
predicted behaviors at baseline in aWL study.
Hypothesis: Participants will report triggers that do not reflect
their baseline predictions.
The means for each trigger were compared in an
independent samples t-test. Results revealed triggers that
were significantly more frequently reported than others for
particular groups:
1. Low Cognitive Restraint participants more frequently
reported:
“Boredom” (p = 0.04)
“Felt I deserved it” (p = 0.05)
“Lack of motivation” (p = 0.06)
2. High External Disinhibition participants more frequently
reported:
“Negative thoughts” (p = 0.02)