Skip to main content

Table 1 Descriptive characteristics and reliability estimates of psychosocial scales, Study 1, N = 49.

From: Reliability and validity of brief psychosocial measures related to dietary behaviors

Variable

# of items

Baseline

Two Week Follow-up

ICC

95% CI

  

M

SD

alpha

M

SD

alpha

  

Dietary Fat Reduction

         

   Pros

4

3.27

.88

.66

3.39

.85

.66

.72

.55-.83

   Cons

4

2.24

.79

.64

2.37

.79

.71

.71

.54-.83

   Self-efficacy

5

2.82

.82

.80

2.96

.99

.89

.70

.53-.82

Dietary Fiber and Whole Grains

         

   Pros

4

2.95

.89

.76

3.12

.90

.82

.73

.56-.84

   Cons

4

1.84

.80

.73

1.92

.75

.74

.63

.43-.78

   Self-efficacy

8

2.95

.74

.83

3.06

.86

.88

.75

.60-.85

Fruit & Vegetable

         

   Pros

4

3.54

.81

.73

3.57

.85

.77

.78

.64-.87

   Cons

4

2.22

.83

.61

2.31

.84

.69

.74

.58-.84

   Self-efficacy

6

3.12

.80

.76

3.15

.87

.81

.70

.52-.82

Healthy Eating

         

   Change strategies

15

3.07

.78

.91

2.99

.76

.90

.79

.66-.88

   Social support

6

2.32

.85

.82

2.22

.82

.82

.68

.49-.80

   Environment

4

3.60

.99

.81

3.55

.93

.83

.77

.63-.86

   Enjoyment

7

3.93

.66

.72

3.90

.69

.74

.78

.65-.87

  1. Note. M = mean; SD = standard deviation; ICC = intraclass correlation coefficient; CI = confidence interval; mean scores for each scale have a possible range of 1-5.