The psychometric properties of the Readiness and Motivation Questionnaire: A symptom-specific measure of readiness for change in the eating disorders.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Readiness for change, as assessed by the readiness and motivation interview (RMI), predicts a number of clinical outcome variables in eating disorders including enrollment in intensive treatment, symptom change, dropout, and relapse. Although clinically useful, the training and administration of the RMI is time consuming. The purpose of this research was to (a) develop a self-report, symptom-specific version of the RMI, the readiness and motivation questionnaire (RMQ), that can be used to assess readiness for change across all eating disorder diagnoses and (b) establish its psychometric properties. The RMQ provides stage of change, internality, and confidence scores for each of 4 eating disorder symptom domains (restriction, bingeing, and cognitive and compensatory behaviors). Individuals (N = 244) with current eating disorder diagnoses completed the RMQ and measures of convergent, discriminant, and criterion validity. Similar to the RMI scores, readiness scores on the RMQ differed according to symptom domain. Regarding criterion validity, RMQ scores were significantly associated with ratings of anticipated difficulty of recovery activities and completion of recovery activities. The RMQ contributed significant unique variance to anticipated difficulty of recovery activities, beyond those accounted for by the RMI and a questionnaire measure of global readiness. The RMQ is thus an acceptable alternative to the RMI, providing global and domain-specific readiness information when time or cost prohibits use of an interview.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".