OBJECTIVE: This research investigated the validity of the Bulimic Cognitive Distortions Scale and the Mizes Anorectic Cognitions Questionnaire. The ability of these questionnaires to discriminate among individuals with bulimia, restrained eaters, and normals was also investigated. METHOD: Scores on these retrospective self-report questionnaires were compared to cognitions assessed via in vivo thought-sampling. Cognitions of 15 women with bulimia nervosa, 15 restrained eaters, and 15 non-eating disordered women were assessed. RESULTS: Results indicated that both the BCDS and the MAC successfully discriminated among individuals with bulimia, restrained eaters, and normals, and adequately measured in vivo attitudes and beliefs associated with food and eating, weight and body-image, and low self-efficacy. DISCUSSION: These findings support the continued use of both the BCDS and the MAC. Copyright 2000 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
OBJECTIVE: This research investigated the validity of the Bulimic Cognitive Distortions Scale and the Mizes Anorectic Cognitions Questionnaire. The ability of these questionnaires to discriminate among individuals with bulimia, restrained eaters, and normals was also investigated. METHOD: Scores on these retrospective self-report questionnaires were compared to cognitions assessed via in vivo thought-sampling. Cognitions of 15 women with bulimia nervosa, 15 restrained eaters, and 15 non-eating disorderedwomen were assessed. RESULTS: Results indicated that both the BCDS and the MAC successfully discriminated among individuals with bulimia, restrained eaters, and normals, and adequately measured in vivo attitudes and beliefs associated with food and eating, weight and body-image, and low self-efficacy. DISCUSSION: These findings support the continued use of both the BCDS and the MAC. Copyright 2000 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.