An analysis of intuitive eating scores and contributing factors in female university students with dieting experience

Abstract

Intuitive Eating (IE) is an approach that encourages individuals to eat according to their body’s hunger and fullness cues, aiming to establish a healthy relationship with food without restrictions. This study investigated the association between IE and psychological factors (optimism, life satisfaction, proactive coping, and self-esteem) among Japanese university students. The results showed that, among female students, IE was positively correlated with life satisfaction and optimism. Additionally, students with no history of dieting tended to have higher IES-2 scores, suggesting that prior dieting experience may be associated with lower adherence to intuitive eating principles. These findings suggest that nutrition guidance incorporating IE may be effective as psychological support in future interventions.

 Introduction

 Dieting and intuitive eating: conceptual distinctions and implications

Dietary habits play a crucial role in maintaining health and well-being, yet approaches to food intake differ significantly. Two major perspectives on eating behavior—dieting and intuitive eating—have fundamentally different philosophies and impact both physiological and psychological health in various ways.

Dieting, in its narrow definition, refers to the conscious restriction of food intake with the primary goal of weight loss or body composition modification. This method includes managing calorie intake, restricting specific nutrients, or adhering to externally imposed dietary rules. While effective for short-term weight loss, studies indicate potential downsides such as increased stress, guilt, and a heightened risk of disordered eating behaviors¹⁾. Additionally, strict dieting may disrupt metabolic homeostasis and negatively affect the circadian rhythm of appetite-related hormones (e.g., ghrelin and leptin), as well as autonomic nervous system balance²⁾.

In contrast, intuitive eating is a non-restrictive approach that encourages individuals to eat based on internal hunger and satiety cues. Introduced by Tribole and Resch, this concept is based on ten core principles, including rejecting diet mentality, honoring hunger, respecting fullness, and finding satisfaction in eating³⁾. This approach emphasizes bodily autonomy and aims to promote sustainable and healthful eating behaviors rather than relying on external constraints. Research suggests that intuitive eating is associated with improved psychological well-being, reduced incidence of eating disorders, and better metabolic health markers²⁾.

The fundamental difference between dieting and intuitive eating lies in the mechanisms guiding food choices. Dieting is externally regulated, emphasizing calorie restriction and portion control, whereas intuitive eating is internally regulated, prioritizing self-awareness and responsiveness to physiological needs. Furthermore, strict dietary rules in dieting often lead to psychological distress, whereas intuitive eating fosters self-acceptance and reduces food-related stress.

Understanding these two contrasting approaches is essential for developing effective nutritional strategies that promote both physical and mental well-being. Future research should explore the long-term effects of intuitive eating on metabolic regulation, circadian rhythms, and autonomic nervous system function, particularly in comparison to traditional dietary interventions. As concerns over diet culture and its psychological implications continue to rise, shifting the focus from restrictive dieting to mindful and intuitive eating may offer a more sustainable and health-conscious approach to nutrition.

Intuitive Eating (IE) is an approach aimed at establishing a healthy relationship with food, emphasizing the importance of listening to one’s natural hunger and fullness cues^3,4). Instead of adhering to external diet rules or restrictions, IE promotes enjoying meals while tuning into the body’s internal signals.

The concept of IE was first introduced in the book Intuitive Eating by dietitians Tribole and Resch in 1996⁵⁾. Often seen as a counter to diet culture, this method emphasizes body positivity, self-compassion, and mindful eating. IE is based on the following ten principles⁶⁾:

1. Reject the diet mentality: Stop believing that weight loss and dieting are the keys to health and happiness.

2. Honor your hunger: Respond to hunger cues without waiting until extreme hunger sets in.

3. Make peace with food: Allow yourself to eat all types of food without guilt or restriction.

4. Challenge the food police: Reject societal rules about what and how much one should eat.

5. Feel your fullness: Pay attention to your body’s signals and stop eating when satisfied.

6. Discover satisfaction: Enjoy the taste and experience of eating to achieve satisfaction.

7. Cope with emotions without using food: Address emotions like stress or sadness through non-food methods.

8. Respect your body: Accept and honor your genetic body type without trying to conform to unrealistic standards.

9. Feel the difference with movement: Focus on how movement feels rather than using exercise solely as a weight management tool.

10. Honor your health with gentle nutrition: Choose foods that are nutritious and enjoyable without adhering to rigid rules.

The Intuitive Eating Scale-2 (IES-2) was developed as a psychological tool to measure the degree of intuitive eating⁷⁾. This scale assesses IE across four main dimensions and was further refined with the release of the IES-3 in 2024⁸⁾:

1. Unconditional permission to eat: Evaluates the freedom to eat all types of food without restriction.

2. Eating for physical rather than emotional reasons: Measures the tendency to eat based on physical hunger and satiety rather than emotional triggers.

3. Reliance on hunger and satiety cues: Assesses trust in one’s internal signals to guide eating decisions.

4. Body-food choice congruence: Reflects the alignment between food choices and the body’s nutritional needs.

Each dimension is rated on a 5-point Likert scale, where higher scores indicate stronger adherence to IE principles. In Western countries, IES-2 scores are widely used in research and clinical evaluations to support healthy eating behaviors and address issues like eating disorders and binge eating^9–11).

Using the IES-2 allows individuals to objectively assess their practice of intuitive eating and identify areas for improvement. Although research on IES-2 has been actively conducted in Western contexts, there is a lack of studies exploring its associated factors in Japan.

This study aims to fill this gap by investigating the relationship between IES-2 and psychological factors among male and female students (aged 18–23 years) from the School of Human Health Sciences and the School of Education at M University.

 Materials and Methods

 Participants

The study targeted male and female students (aged 18–23 years) from M University’s School of Human Health Sciences and School of Education. An online survey was distributed using Google Forms, and responses were received from 208 individuals. After excluding duplicate responses and participants with missing data on dieting history, the final analysis included 190 participants (75 males and 115 females) (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.  Flow chart in this study

 Survey period

The survey was conducted between June and July 2024.

 Survey items

The questionnaire consisted of 64 items, including the following psychological scales and related variables¹²⁾ (All questionnaires are listed in Table 1):

Table 1.Questionnaire items used in this study

	Instructions:
1	Age: Participants were asked to report their age in years.
2	Gender: Participants selected their gender (Male or Female).
Please answer the following questions on a scale of 1 to 5. (Administered via Google Forms)
Intuitive Eating Scale-2 (IES-2)
1	I pay attention to avoid foods high in fat, carbohydrates, or calories.
2	I sometimes eat when I am not hungry, especially when I feel emotional (e.g., anxious, depressed, sad).
3	I allow myself to eat certain foods when I crave them.
4	I feel guilty when I eat foods I think are bad for me.
5	I eat even when I am not hungry, especially when I feel lonely.
6	My body tells me when it is time to eat.
7	My body tells me what foods I should eat.
8	My body tells me how much I should eat.
9	I have foods that I forbid myself to eat.
10	I eat to soothe negative emotions.
11	I eat when I am stressed, even if I am not hungry.
12	I can cope with negative emotions (e.g., anxiety or sadness) without eating.
13	I do not eat out of boredom.
14	I do not eat for comfort or solace when I feel lonely.
15	I manage stress or anxiety without turning to food.
16	I allow myself to eat what I want at the moment.
17	I do not follow strict personal rules about food, quantity, or timing, nor do I diet.
18	I primarily choose foods that are good for my body.
19	I primarily eat foods that I think improve my health or performance.
20	I primarily choose foods that help build my strength.
21	I rely on hunger to decide when to eat.
22	I rely on satiety (feeling of fullness) to decide when to stop eating.
23	My body tells me when I have eaten enough.
Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS)
1	I am living close to my ideal life.
2	The conditions of my life are excellent.
3	I am satisfied with my life.
4	So far, I have gotten the important things I want in life.
5	If I could live my life over, I would not change much.
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
1	I am satisfied with myself.
2	I often feel I am not good enough.
3	I feel I have a number of good qualities.
4	I feel that I am as capable as others.
5	I do not have much confidence in myself.
6	At times, I feel useless.
7	I feel that I am at least as valuable as other people.
8	I wish I could have more respect for myself.
9	I often think poorly of myself.
10	I feel positive about myself.
Proactive Coping Inventory
1	I have leadership qualities.
2	I expect things to resolve themselves naturally.
3	After achieving a goal, I set higher goals.
4	I enjoy taking on challenges or completing difficult tasks.
5	I visualize achieving my dreams and take action to fulfill them.
6	Even after setbacks, I achieve most of my goals.
7	I identify what is necessary to succeed.
8	I do not give up when faced with obstacles.
9	I have low expectations because I often fail.
10	When applying for a job, I can imagine myself succeeding.
11	I view obstacles as positive experiences.
12	Even when others say it is impossible, I persevere.
13	I actively work to solve problems when they arise.
14	When problems occur, I often think they cannot be resolved.
Life Orientation Test (Revised)
1	Even when uncertain about the future, I expect the best outcome.
2	I can relax easily.
3	I think bad things are likely to happen to me.
4	I consistently think optimistically about the future.
5	I enjoy spending time with friends.
6	Staying busy is important to me.
7	I do not expect things to work out as planned.
8	I rarely feel down.
9	I do not believe good things will happen to me.
10	I think good things happen more often than bad things.

1. IES-2: Assesses IE adherence across four dimensions using a 5-point Likert scale.

2. LOT-R: Evaluates optimism (The Revised Life Orientation Test).

3. SWLS: Measures life satisfaction (Satisfaction With Life Scale).

4. PCI: Assesses proactive coping (Proactive Coping Inventory).

5. Dieting history: Examines whether participants had engaged in dietary restrictions or exercise aimed at weight loss in the past year.

 Statistical analysis

Pearson’s correlation coefficients and student’s t-tests were used to analyze the data. Correlation coefficients (r) ≥0.3 were considered significant, and p-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant.

 Ethical considerations

This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Matsumoto University (Approval No. 138). Participants were informed verbally and in writing that their participation was voluntary.

 Results

 1) Participant characteristics

Table 2 summarizes the demographic characteristics of the participants. The sample included 75 males (39.5%) and 115 females (60.5%), with 34.2% reporting a history of dieting.

Table 2.Participant characteristics

Variable	Total (n = 190)	Male (n = 75)	Female (n = 115)
Gender (Male/Female)	190 (75/115)	75	115
Age (Mean ± SD)	19.7 ± 1.2	19.5 ± 1.2	19.8 ± 1.1
Diet History (Yes/No)	86/104	21/54	65/50

 2) Correlations between IES-2 and psychological factors

No significant correlations were observed between IES-2 and any variables for the total sample (Table 3). However, among females, IES-2 showed significant positive correlations with life satisfaction (r = 0.442) and optimism (r = 0.449) (Table 4). Weak positive correlations were also found with self-esteem (r = 0.336).

Table 3.Correlation Between IES-2 and Psychological Indicators (Overall)

Variable	IES-2	Self-Esteem	Life Satisfaction (SWLS)	Proactive Coping	Optimism (LOTR)
IES-2	—
Self-Esteem	0.208**	—
Life Satisfaction (SWLS)	0.267**	0.567**	—
Proactive Coping	0.229**	0.491**	0.468**	—
Optimism (LOTR)	0.258**	0.874**	0.860**	0.510**	—

Note: Values in bold indicate **p < 0.01.

Table 4.Correlation between IES-2 and psychological indicators (female)

Variable	IES-2	Self-Esteem	Life Satisfaction (SWLS)	Proactive Coping	Optimism (LOTR)
IES-2	—
Self-Esteem	0.342**	—
Life Satisfaction (SWLS)	0.442**	0.549**	—
Proactive Coping	0.346**	0.336**	0.398**	—
Optimism (LOTR)	0.449**	0.872**	0.854**	0.388**	—

Note: Values in bold indicate **p < 0.01.

For males, the correlations between IES-2 and psychological indicators were not significant, as shown in Table 5. Although there were weak correlations between IES-2 and self-esteem (r = 0.017), life satisfaction (r = 0.012), and optimism (r = 0.013), these values were not statistically significant. Similarly, proactive coping showed a weak correlation with IES-2 (r = 0.051). The lack of significant findings for males suggests that factors influencing intuitive eating may differ by gender, requiring further investigation with a larger male sample size.

Table 5.Correlation between IES-2 and psychological indicators (male)

Variable	IES-2	Self-Esteem	Life Satisfaction (SWLS)	Proactive Coping	Optimism (LOTR)
IES-2	—
Self-Esteem	0.017	—
Life Satisfaction (SWLS)	0.012	0.610**	—
Proactive Coping	0.051	0.648**	0.538**	—
Optimism (LOTR)	0.013	0.893**	0.868**	0.640**	—

Note: Values in bold indicate **p < 0.01.

 3) Relationship between IES-2 and dieting history

IES-2 scores were significantly higher in individuals without a history of dieting (p < 0.001). This trend was also observed in females (p < 0.005), while no significant differences were found among males (p = 0.252). These findings indicate that individuals who have not engaged in dieting may be more likely to practice intuitive eating, whereas those with dieting experience might exhibit lower adherence to intuitive eating principles. (Tables 6–8).

Table 6.Comparison of psychological indicators by diet history (overall)

Variable	With Diet History (n = 86)	Without Diet History (n = 104)	p-value
IES-2	3.2 ± 0.5	3.5 ± 0.5	<0.001**
Self-Esteem	19.8 ± 6.5	20.7 ± 5.4	0.317
Life Satisfaction (SWLS)	22.8 ± 6.6	23.6 ± 5.8	0.327
Proactive Coping	35.1 ± 6.7	35.2 ± 7.0	0.902
Optimism (LOTR)	51.0 ± 11.7	53.7 ± 10.2	0.083

Note: Values are presented as Mean ± SD. Bold indicates **p < 0.01 (T-test).

Table 7.Comparison of psychological indicators by diet history (female)

Variable	With Diet History (n = 65)	Without Diet History (n = 50)	p-value
IES-2	3.1 ± 0.5	3.4 ± 0.4	0.001**
Self-Esteem	22.8 ± 6.6	23.0 ± 4.8	0.831
Life Satisfaction (SWLS)	20.0 ± 6.2	20.5 ± 5.0	0.647
Proactive Coping	35.0 ± 6.9	34.4 ± 5.5	0.637
Optimism (LOTR)	51.6 ± 11.5	53.8 ± 9.0	0.262

Note: Values are presented as Mean ± SD. Bold indicates **p < 0.01 (T-test).

Table 8.Comparison of psychological indicators by diet history (male)

Variable	With Diet History (n = 21)	Without Diet History (n = 54)	p-value
IES-2	3.4 ± 0.5	3.6 ± 0.5	0.252
Self-Esteem	19.9 ± 7.0	20.9 ± 5.9	0.547
Life Satisfaction (SWLS)	22.6 ± 7.1	24.1 ± 6.7	0.402
Proactive Coping	35.7 ± 6.5	36.0 ± 8.2	0.883
Optimism (LOTR)	50.0 ± 12.1	53.7 ± 11.4	0.215

Note: Values are presented as Mean ± SD.

 Discussion

This cross-sectional study revealed that females without a dieting history had significantly higher IES-2 scores, indicating a stronger tendency to engage in IE. While the study does not establish causation, the findings suggest that prior dieting experience may influence the ability to rely on internal hunger and fullness cues.

Research on the direct impact of IE on the circadian rhythm of hormones and the autonomic nervous system function is limited. However, studies suggest that meal timing and eating patterns can influence these physiological rhythms^13–15). For instance, there are reviews examining how meal timing affects circadian rhythms, clock genes, circadian hormones, and metabolic functions.

Furthermore, intermittent fasting (IF) and time-restricted feeding (TRF) have been suggested to impact circadian rhythms and metabolic functions.These findings indicate that meal timing and eating patterns may influence the circadian rhythm of hormones and autonomic nervous system function. However, further research is needed to determine how Intuitive Eating specifically affects these physiological rhythms.

Dieting behavior often shifts individuals’ attention from internal bodily signals, such as hunger and fullness, to external metrics, including calorie counts, body weight, and societal expectations. This redirection can erode trust in interoceptive sensations, reducing individuals’ ability to rely on their body’s natural cues for regulating eating behavior^16,17). Such reliance on external factors may foster disordered eating patterns, including emotional eating and excessive restriction, both of which are counterproductive to long-term physical and psychological health.

The findings of this study align with the meta-analysis by Linardon et al. (2021)¹⁸⁾, which demonstrated a robust negative association between dieting behaviors and intuitive eating across diverse populations.

 Body image and cultural influences

Body image dissatisfaction is a pervasive issue among young women, particularly in university-aged populations. Research has shown that dissatisfaction often centers around specific body regions, such as the abdomen and lower body, which are perceived as problematic¹⁶⁾. This dissatisfaction can be exacerbated by cultural ideals that equate thinness with beauty and value, while labeling plumpness as unattractive. Furthermore, young women may internalize not only personal dissatisfaction with their bodies but also a perceived judgment from others, creating a compounded psychological burden.

In Japan, these societal pressures are amplified by the influence of media and social norms, which frequently portray unattainable body ideals. Media exposure may discourage individuals from making autonomous food choices, instead prompting adherence to restrictive eating practices or fad diets. This cultural backdrop may explain why females in Japan are particularly vulnerable to distorted eating behaviors and why interventions to promote IE are especially critical in this demographic^19,20).

In contrast, the lack of significant findings among males in this study could be attributed to multiple factors. First, males may experience less societal pressure to conform to specific body ideals compared to females. Second, the smaller sample size of male participants may have limited the statistical power to detect meaningful correlations. Additionally, males may differ in their awareness of or responsiveness to bodily cues, highlighting the need for further gender-specific research on IE practices.

 Interoceptive awareness and psychological well-being

The findings also underscore the importance of interoceptive awareness—the ability to recognize and respond to internal bodily cues—in promoting healthier eating behaviors. Individuals who scored higher on the IES-2 demonstrated a greater reliance on hunger and fullness cues, which likely supports more balanced and autonomous eating patterns. By contrast, individuals with lower IES-2 scores may prioritize external rules over their physiological needs, leading to less adaptive food-related decision-making.

Previous studies have identified psychological traits that align with successful IE practice. These include accepting and respecting one’s body, rejecting dichotomous thinking about food, and focusing on the sensory experiences of eating, such as taste, texture, and satisfaction¹⁹⁾. Such traits suggest that individuals who engage in IE develop a more holistic and positive relationship with food, which is associated with increased life satisfaction, reduced stress, and improved overall well-being.

 Health implications of dieting

Repeated dieting can have profound effects on both physical and psychological health. Restrictive eating behaviors may lead to metabolic adaptations that reduce energy expenditure, making future weight loss more difficult and contributing to weight cycling. Moreover, dieting often fosters a preoccupation with food and body weight, which can exacerbate disordered eating patterns and reduce self-esteem over time. These negative outcomes highlight the potential benefits of promoting IE as an alternative approach to achieving sustainable health and well-being.

 Intervention opportunities

The findings of this study suggest that interventions promoting IE could have significant benefits, particularly among young women. Educational programs that encourage acceptance of diverse body types, emphasize the importance of interoceptive awareness, and challenge harmful societal norms about beauty could foster healthier eating behaviors and improve psychological resilience.

Additionally, tailored interventions that address the psychological factors associated with IE—such as self-esteem, optimism, and proactive coping—could further enhance the effectiveness of such programs. For individuals with a history of disordered eating or chronic dieting, integrating IE principles into nutritional counseling may help shift their focus from external metrics to internal bodily cues, ultimately improving their relationship with food²¹⁾.

 Strengths, limitations, and future directions

One of the strengths of this study is its focus on a population that is underrepresented in IE research in Japan. By examining psychological correlates of IE, the study contributes to a growing body of knowledge on the importance of interoceptive awareness and intuitive eating behaviors.

However, the study has several limitations. First, its cross-sectional design precludes any conclusions about causality. Longitudinal studies are needed to explore how dieting history and psychological factors influence the development of IE practices over time. Second, the reliance on self-reported data may introduce biases, such as social desirability bias. Finally, the relatively small sample size, particularly for males, limits the generalizability of the findings. Future research should aim to include larger, more diverse samples and investigate potential gender differences in IE practices more comprehensively.

 Conclusion

In summary, this study highlights the importance of IE as a potential pathway to healthier eating behaviors and improved psychological well-being, particularly for young women. By promoting interoceptive awareness and challenging societal norms that perpetuate disordered eating, interventions targeting IE could provide a valuable tool for addressing both individual and public health challenges.

 Acknowledgments

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to all the students who participated in this study. Their time, effort, and cooperation were invaluable to the success of this research. We deeply appreciate their willingness to contribute to our investigation.

 Author Contributions

RK and RH designed the study. AN and CM conducted the questionnaire surveys and performed the statistical analyses. MO provided critical advice and contributed to the discussion. RH drafted the manuscript.

 Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest associated with this manuscript.

References

• 1.  Van Dyke N, Drinkwater EJ. Relationships between intuitive eating and health indicators: literature review. Public Health Nutr 17; 1757–1766: 2014.
• 2.  Hamerman EJ. Cooking and disgust sensitivity influence preference for attending insect-based food events. Appetite 96; 319–326: 2016.
• 3.  Tribole E, Resch E. Intuitive Eating: A Revolutionary Anti-Diet Approach, 4th Edition New York, St. Martin's Griffin, 2020.
• 4.   Eaton  M,  Probst  Y,  Foster  T, et al. A systematic review of observational studies exploring the relationship between health and non-weight-centric eating behaviours. Appetite 199; 107361: 2024.
• 5.   Tribole  E,  Resch  E. Intuitive eating: a recovery book for the chronic dieter: rediscover the pleasures of eating and rebuild your body image. Harris B ed. St. Martin’s Press, 1996.
• 6.   Cole  RE,  Horacek  T. Effectiveness of the “My Body Knows When” intuitive-eating pilot program. Am J Health Behav 34; 286–297: 2010.
• 7.   Flores-Quijano  ME,  Mota-Gonzalez  C,  Rozada  G, et al. The intuitive eating scale-2 adapted for Mexican pregnant women: psychometric properties and influence of sociodemographic variables. Nutrients 15; 4837: 2023.
• 8.   Tylka  TL,  Maiano  C,  Fuller-Tyszkiewicz  M, et al. The intuitive eating scale-3: development and psychometric evaluation. Appetite 199; 107407: 2024.
• 9.   Fekih-Romdhane  F,  Jiang  C,  Obeid  S, et al. Psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the Intuitive Eating Scale-2 (IES-2) in a sample of community adults. J Eat Disord 11; 53: 2023.
• 10.   Butt  M,  Ssentongo  P,  Rogers  AM, et al. Associations of food addiction symptomatology and disordered eating behaviors in a pre-surgical bariatric population. Nutrients 15; 3474: 2023.
• 11.   Ayyıldız  F,  Akbulut  G,  Karaçil Ermumcu  MŞ, et al. Emotional and intuitive eating: an emerging approach to eating behaviours related to obesity. J Nutr Sci 12; e19: 2023.
• 12.   Tylka  TL,  Wood-Barcalow  NL. The body appreciation scale-2: item refinement and psychometric evaluation. Body Image 12; 53–67: 2015.
• 13.   Manoogian  ENC,  Panda  S. Circadian rhythms, time-restricted feeding, and healthy aging. Ageing Res Rev 39; 59–67: 2016.
• 14.   Potter  GDM,  Cade  JE,  Grant  PJ,  Hardie  LJ. Nutrition and the circadian system. Br J Nutr 116; 434–442: 2016.
• 15.  McHill AW, Butler MP. Eating around the clock: circadian rhythms of eating and metabolism. Annu Rev Nutr 44; 25–50: 2024.
• 16.   Tazaki  S. The relationship between thinness desire, self-evaluation, and self-acceptance among female university students. Bulletin of the Graduate School of Education, Hiroshima University, Part I 56; 39–47: 2007.
• 17.   Yamatsuta  K,  Nomura  S. Abnormal eating behaviors among female university students: development, reliability, and validity of a body image dissatisfaction scale (part 2). Journal of Japanese Society of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynecology 10; 163–171: 2015.
• 18.   Linardon  J,  Tylka  TL,  Fuller-Tyszkiewicz  M. Intuitive eating and its psychological correlates: a meta-analysis. Int J Eat Disord 54; 1073–1098: 2021.
• 19.   Burnette  B,  Tylka  TL. The intuitive eating treatment manual: an essential guide for nutrition and mental health professionals. New Harbinger Publications, 1–208: 2024.
• 20.   Kawasaki  Y,  Akamatsu  R,  Omori  M, et al. Development and validation of the expanded mindful eating scale. Int J Health Care Qual Assur 33; 309–321: 2020.
• 21.   Babbott  KM,  Tylka  T,  van der Werf  B, et al. Intuitive eating scale-2-EA: psychometric properties and factor structure of the adapted IES-2 for early adolescents. Eat Behav 51; 101813: 2023.