Cited by 35Eating Disorders and BehaviorsNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Development and validation of the Food Noise Questionnaire

Open access
Diktas, Hanim E., Cardel, Michelle I., Foster, Gary D., LeBlanc, Monique M., Dickinson, Stephanie L., Ables, Erin M., Chen, Xiwei, Nathan, Rebecca +2 more·2025·Obesity

Abstract

Objective: Food noise has received attention in the media, although no validated questionnaires exist to measure it. This study developed and tested the reliability and validity of the Food Noise Questionnaire (FNQ). Methods: Participants ( N = 400) successfully completed, the FNQ and a demographic questionnaire and self‐reported weight and height. A subsample ( n = 150) completed the FNQ 7 days later for test–retest reliability, and this subsample's first FNQ data were subjected to exploratory factor analysis. The remaining subsample ( n = 250) completed two preoccupation with food questionnaires to test convergent validity, along with mood, anxiety, and stress questionnaires to test for discriminant validity. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted using this subsample's FNQ data. Results: Data from 396 participants were analyzed (4 participants did not complete all FNQ items). The FNQ had excellent internal consistency reliability (Cronbach α = 0.93) and high test–retest reliability ( r = 0.79; p < 0.001; mean [SD] = 7.4 [1.0] days between administration). Factor analyses found that the five FNQ items loaded onto a single factor, with good fit indices ( χ 2 [5] = 52.87, p < 0.001; root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.20; comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.95; standardized root mean squared residual [SRMR] = 0.03). The FNQ showed good convergent (all r > 0.78; p < 0.001) and discriminant (all r < 0.39; p < 0.001) validity. Conclusions: The FNQ provides a psychometrically reliable and valid measure of food noise, although further research is needed to evaluate its clinical utility.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/oby.24216

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 26 · Cited by 35

Authors
Diktas, H. E., Cardel, M. I., Foster, G. D., LeBlanc, M. M., Dickinson, S. L., Ables, E. M., Chen, X., Nathan, R., Shapiro, D., & Martin, C. K.
Affiliations
  • Pennington Biomedical Research Center (US)
  • University of Florida Health (US)
  • WW International, Inc. (United States) (US)
  • Southeastern Louisiana University (US)
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
Corresponding author
Martin, Corby K.
Venue
Obesity
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2025-01-19
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
289-297
ISSN
  • 1930-7381 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-739X
OpenAlex
W4406628809
Cited by
35
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 7
FWCI
40.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Obesity (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • WW International
  • National Institutes of Health (P30 DK072476, U54 GM104940)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
questionnaire development, psychometric validation, test-retest reliability, convergent validity, discriminant validity, food preoccupation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Anxiety, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Food, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Noise, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Stress, Psychological, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult, Self Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review