Development and validation of the Food Noise Questionnaire
Open accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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?
Patients frequently report a reduction in intrusive food-related thoughts during GLP-1 RA use, referred to as food noise.
“patients frequently report a reduction in intrusive food-related thoughts during GLP-1 RA use, referred to in some literature as ‘food noise’, recently defined and measured using a validated questionnaire [12].”
From Bridging the nutrition guidance gap for GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy assisted weight loss: Lessons from bariatric surgery (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
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.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Obesity
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2025-01-19
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 289-297
- ISSN
- 1930-7381 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-739X
- PMC
- PMC11774004
- OpenAlex
- W4406628809
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 7
- FWCI
- 40.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- 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