Validation of the French Version of the Yale Food Addiction Scale: An Examination of its Factor Structure, Reliability, and Construct Validity in a Nonclinical Sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The concept of food addiction has recently been proposed by applying the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision, criteria for substance dependence to eating behaviour. Food addiction has received increased attention given that it may play a role in binge eating, eating disorders, and the recent increase in obesity prevalence. Currently, there is no psychometrically sound tool for assessing food addiction in French. Our study aimed to test the psychometric properties of a French version of the Yale Food Addiction Scale (YFAS) by establishing its factor structure and construct validity in a nonclinical population. METHOD: A total of 553 participants were assessed for food addiction (French version of the YFAS) and binge eating behaviour (Bulimic Investigatory Test Edinburgh and Binge Eating Scale). We tested the scale's factor structure (factor analysis for dichotomous data based on tetrachoric correlation coefficients), internal consistency, and construct validity with measures of binge eating. RESULTS: Our results supported a 1-factor structure, which accounted for 54.1% of the variance. This tool had adequate reliability and high construct validity with measures of binge eating in this population, both in its diagnosis and symptom count version. A 2-factor structure explained an additional 9.1% of the variance, and could differentiate between patients with high, compared with low, levels of insight regarding addiction symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, we validated a psychometrically sound French version of the YFAS, both in its symptom count and diagnostic version. Future studies should validate this tool in clinical samples.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".