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.