The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Cross-validation of the reduced form of the Food Craving Questionnaire-Trait using confirmatory factor analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00433 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luca Iani, Claudio Barbaranelli, Caterina Lombardo |
| Abstract |
The Food Craving Questionnaire-Trait (FCQ-T) is commonly used to assess habitual food cravings among individuals. Previous studies have shown that a brief version of this instrument (FCQ-T-r) has good reliability and validity. This article is the first to use Confirmatory factor analysis to examine the psychometric properties of the FCQ-T-r in a cross-validation study. Habitual food cravings, as well as emotion regulation strategies, affective states, and disordered eating behaviors, were investigated in two independent samples of non-clinical adult volunteers (Sample 1: N = 368; Sample 2: N = 246). Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to simultaneously test model fit statistics and dimensionality of the instrument. FCQ-T-r reliability was assessed by computing the composite reliability coefficient. Analysis supported the unidimensional structure of the scale and fit indices were acceptable for both samples. The FCQ-T-r showed excellent reliability and moderate to high correlations with negative affect and disordered eating. Our results indicate that the FCQ-T-r scores can be reliably used to assess habitual cravings in an Italian non-clinical sample of adults. The robustness of these results is tested by a cross-validation of the model using two independent samples. Further research is required to expand on these findings, particularly in children and adolescents. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 70 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 20% |
| Researcher | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 13 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 35 | 49% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 16 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 June 2022.
All research outputs
#7,547,176
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,042
of 30,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,194
of 264,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#230
of 471 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,283 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,999 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 471 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.