Journal of Eating Disorders (Nov 2024)
Assessing disordered eating behaviours and attitudes: Factor structure and measurement invariance of the Arabic version of the eating attitudes test (EAT-26) in Saudi Arabia
Abstract
Abstract Background The factorial structure of the Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-26) has been found to be inconsistent across studies and samples. This study aimed to resolve inconsistencies in the factorial structure of the Arabic version of the EAT-26 by identifying the best-fitting model and test its measurement invariance across sexes and BMI categories in a large non-clinical Saudi sample. Methods 1,734 Saudi adults (M age 26.88 and SD 9.13), predominantly female, completed an online survey. Several existing models were tested (e.g., original 26-item three-factor model, second order 26-item three-factor model, 20-item four-factor model, and 16-item four-factor model) using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Fit indices including the CFI, SRMR, and RMSEA were used to identify the best-fitting model for Arabic version of the EAT-26. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) was used to test measurement invariance. Results The original three-factor model and two other common models demonstrated poor fit (e.g., CFI = 0.727; SRMR = 0.0911; RMSEA = 0.085 [90% CI 0.082–0.087] for the original three-factor model). Instead, a 16-item, four-factor structure [(Self-Perceptions of Body Weight), (Dieting), (Awareness of Food Contents), and (Food Preoccupation)] showed acceptable fit ([CFI = 0.904; SRMR = 0.0554; RMSEA = 0.073 [90% CI 0.068- 0.077]). Internal consistency was good (α and ω = 0.88), and measurement invariance was supported across sex (male and female) and BMI categories (underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese). Conclusions These findings underscore the need for culturally relevant validation of the EAT-26 among Arabic-speaking populations, as the revised factorial structure diverged from previously established models. Future research should further examine this revised 16-item, four-factor structure in clinical settings.
Keywords