Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Result of confirmatory factor analysis of the eating behavior pattern questionnaire for participants.

Model fit indices: χ2/df: 1.28; RMSEA: 0.034; CFI: 0.954; TLI: 0.936; SRMR: 0.047. ɛ1 to ɛ9 represent error variances of variables. Small numbers at the corner of the rectangular objects are standardized intercepts (the predicted value of the variables when all the predictors are zero).

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Cronbach’s alpha and scoring for eating behavior patterns questionnaire.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Selected characteristics of the participants by BMI groups (N = 250).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Dietary intake and eating behavior of participants by BMI groups (N = 250).

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Correlation among variables used in SEM modeling.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 2.

Path diagram of the studied model in two BMI categories, a: LBMI group (BMI<21.75) (N = 125) and b: HBMI group (21.75≤ BMI) (N = 125).

Note: CHO: carbohydrates. Standardized coefficients are provided. Bold paths are significant (*: p<0.05; **: p<0.01 and ***: p<0.001). Potential confounding variables are illustrated in italic letters. Rectangles and ovals are used to represent observed vs latent variables and ɛ1 to ɛ7 represent error variances of variables. Model fit indices: χ2/df: 1.38; RMSEA: 0.055; CFI: 0.964; GFI: 0.888; TLI: 0.943; SRMR: 0.066.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 5.

Direct, indirect and total effects of evaluated models.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Tests for group invariance (low-to-normal vs. normal-to-high BMI groups) of parameters used in SEM modeling.

More »

Table 6 Expand