Psychometric Validation of the Motivation for Healthy Eating Scale (MHES)

doi:10.4236/psych.2013.42020

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Psychology

2013. Vol.4, No.2, 136-141

Published Online February 2013 in SciRes

(http://www.scirp.org/journal/psych) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/psych.2013.42020

136

Psychometric Validation of the Motivation for Healthy Eating

Scale (MHES)

Yoshiko Kato1, Makoto Iwanaga2, Roswith Roth3, Tomoko Hamasaki4, Elfriede Greimel5

1Graduate School of Human Development and Environment, Kobe University, Kobe, Japan

2Graduate School of Integrated Arts and Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan

3Institute of Psychology, Graz University, Graz, Austria

4Department of Nutrition, Kyushu Women’s University, Kitakyushu, Japan

5Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria

Email: [email protected]

Received October 18th, 2012; revised November 18th, 2012; accepted December 16th, 2012

The aim of this study is to evaluate the psychometric properties of a Japanese version of the Motivation

for Healthy Eating Scale (MHES), a modified version of the Regulation of Eating Behavior Scale that as-

sesses the motivational orientation toward healthy dietary regulation. In the first study, a sample of 490

female Japanese undergraduate students completed the MHES. In the second study, 357 female under-

graduate students completed the Balanced Diet Scale (BDS), and Subjective Health Status Questionnaire

(SHSQ) in addition to the MHES. The MEHS showed good internal consistency, construct validity, and

criterion validity as measured by correlation with scores on the BDS and SHSQ. Psychometric analyses of

the MEHS revealed a six-factor scale structure. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient ranged from .72 to .84 (In-

trinsic motivation: .80, Integrated regulation: .82, Identified regulation: .84, Introjected regulation: .73,

External regulation: .77, and Amotivation: .72). Concerning criterion validity, autonomous regulation was

positively associated with BDS scores, whereas controlled regulation was negatively associated with

SHSQ scores. The results indicate good psychometric properties for the Japanese version of the MHES. It

might be confirmed that fostering autonomous regulation lead healthy eating habits and enhance subjec-

tive health.

Keywords: Eating Regulation; Psychometric Properties; Motivation; Japanese; Self-Determination Theory;

Females

Introduction

Individuals regulate their eating behavior for various reasons,

not only for their health but also to get slim for beauty, and to

obey parent’s opinion etc. Motivation is important to modify

behavior. It is reported that people whose motivation is intrinsic

have greater interest and confidence levels, generate good re-

sults, and maintain the behavior, compared with those who are

merely externally controlled for an action. The different behav-

ioral regulatory styles are based on three types of motivation:

intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and amotivation. It

was said that intrinsic motivation is based in the organismic

needs to be competent and self-determining. It is the inherent

tendency to seek out novelty and challenges, to extent and ex-

ercise one’s capacities, to explore, and to learn spontaneously.

People behave in absence of material reward and external

evaluation. On the other hand external motivation pertains to a

variety of behaviors that are controlled by external factors like

material rewards, and external evaluation. Amotivation refers to

the situation like person fail to the meaning to behave (Deci &

Ryan, 1985).

Because there are functional and experiential differences

between self-motivation and external regulation, self-determi-

nation theory (SDT) has proposed a more differentiated ap-

proach to motivation. SDT has been able to identify some dis-

tinct types of extrinsic motivation. These behavioral regulatory

styles can be differentiated according to the degree of self-

determination. Intrinsically motivated behaviors are performed

for one’s own sake. In contrast, extrinsically motivated behav-

iors are performed as a means to an end and not for one’s own

sake. The reason that people perform with extrinsic motivation

is to achieve an agreeable outcome or to avoid disagreeable

ones (Deci & Ryan, 1975). It was originally thought that ex-

trinsic motivation exclusively refers to non-self-determined

behaviors associated with external force. Deci and Ryan (1985)

have suggested that there are four types of extrinsic motivation

(external regulation, introjected regulation, identified regulation,

and integrated regulation). These motivations can be ordered

continuously based on the degree of one’s self-determination.

External regulation includes behaviors that are governed by

external sources of control; that is, behaviors compelled by

reward and punishment contingencies. With introjected regula-

tion, the external source of control is internalized such that its

actual presence is no longer needed to initiate the behavior.

Individuals who regulate their eating behaviors because they

would feel ashamed of themselves if they do not eat healthily

are motivated by introjected regulation. Here, the control stems

from within the self-imposed pressures such as guilt or anxiety

(Ryan & Connell, 1989). With identified regulation, external

regulation processes are internalized into one’s sense of self.

The motivation is valued and perceived as being chosen spon-

taneously. Although it might not be intrinsically pleasurable, by

identified motivation, the behavior is adopted because one be-

lieves it will be good for his/her health and life. With integrated

Y. KATO ET AL.

regulation, the activity is consistent with other priorities in ones

lives. One believes that healthy eating behavior is an important

aspect of his/her life. SDT postulates that humans have a natu-

ral inclination toward physical and psychological health (Ryan

& Deci, 2000).

Healthy eating behavior is related to an individual’s self-de-

termined regulatory style (Pelletier, Dion, Angelo, Slovinec-

D’Angelo, & Reid, 2004). Contextual and cultural factors are

important in fostering the development of self-determined mo-

tives and may affect the quality of the self-regulatory process.

Understanding people’s motivation for regulating their eating

behavior might be useful for maintaining health and positive

eating behaviors. Pelletier et al. (2004) developed an instrument

to measure different forms of regulation of eating behaviors. It

was confirmed that the dietary behavior measures were related

to improvement in weight and blood lipid parameters. The

Regulations of Eating Behavior Scale (REBS) developed by

Pelletier et al. (2004) measures the different forms of motiva-

tion of maintaining healthy eating behavior as defined by SDT.

However, there is the possibility that it does not fit into the

context of Japanese eating culture and lifestyle. This study aims

1) to create a modified version of the REBS that is specifically

adapted to the Japanese culture and 2) to test the psychometric

properties of this new Japanese version. We hypothesized that

the modified version of the REBS reflects the eating culture and

life style of Japanese women.

Study 1

Method

Participants

A sample of 490 female Japanese undergraduate students

completed the Motivation for Healthy Eating Scale (MHES)

survey. The participants were aged between 18 and 38 years

(mean 19.7 ± 1.4 years). They were informed about the study,

and the research protocol was approved by the University Re-

view Board for human research in accordance with the ethical

standards outlined in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. With the

permission of professors, the participants completed the ques-

tionnaire before the class. They did not receive any incentives

for participating in this study.

Measures

The MHES is based on the REBS scale originally developed

from a series of three studies examining how autonomous and

controlled forms of motivation for the regulation of eating be-

haviors were related to self-reported eating behaviors, and sus-

tained dietary behavior change (Pelletier et al., 2004). The scale

measures different forms of regulation as defined by SDT (Deci

& Ryan, 1985). The English version of the REBS includes 24

items and six subscales: Intrinsic motivation (4 items), Inte-

grated regulation (4 items), Identified regulation (4 items), In-

trojected regulation (4 items), External regulation (4 items), and

Amotivation (4 items). With the permission of the authors of

the REBS it was translated into Japanese and modified to suit

the Japanese culture. Three bilingual persons (two Japanese

native speakers and one English native speaker) collaborate to

translate. At first one forward translation was performed. Japa-

nese native speaker, health professional, familiar with termi-

nology of the area translated the original English items to

Japanese. Then an English native back-translated the Japanese

items to English. At last the items were checked to achieve

conceptual equivalence considering the Japanese culture by the

translators. On this process it was decided that for each sub-

scale, one item should be added, with the exception of external

regulation (for which two new items were added) and modified

the expression a little. The Japanese version was renamed as

Motivation for Healthy Eating Scale (MHES), since this better

reflects the content of the questionnaire. The 31-item version of

the MHES was psychometrically evaluated using a sample of

female undergraduate students as subjects. Items were pre-

sented in random order. Participants estimated the extent to

which an item corresponded to their motivation for healthy

eating behaviors in response to the question “Why are you eat-

ing healthy?” Each item was rated on a 7-point scale, ranging

from 1 (Does not correspond at all) to 7 (Corresponds very

well).

Statistical Analyses

To confirm the structure of the subscale items, principal

component analysis was performed for the MHES. Descriptive

statistics and internal consistency reliability using Cronbach’s

alpha were computed for all scales of the MHES. Internal con-

sistency is a measure of the extent to which items within a scale

correlate with each other to constitute a multi-item scale.

Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were established for all subscales,

and a value ≥ .70 was considered acceptable for internal consis-

tency.

Furthermore, to examine the consecutive structure of this

scale, the Pearson correlations between subscales were calcu-

lated.

Results

Preliminary analyses were performed to screen the data.

Values of kurtosis and skewness were first examined. All vari-

ables of MHES had kurtosis and skewness values below |2|. All

correlations were below .669.

The principal component analysis was performed. On intro-

jected and external regulation items, two components were

extracted. The items on the second component had different

meaning from the items on the first component. Hence, these

items were deleted. In the end, each subscale had a unidimen-

sional structure. Each factor explained about 50% of the vari-

ance. The factor loadings were above .45, and evaluation of the

internal consistency of the subscales was adequate. Cronbach’s

alphas ranged from .71 to .85. Item-total correlation ranged

from .55 to .85.

Table 2 shows the correlations between the subscales. The

adjacent subscales generally shows higher correlations (e.g.,

intrinsic motivation and integrated regulation, r = .734) than the

subscales farther apart (e.g., intrinsic motivation and identified

regulation, r = .677, or intrinsic motivation and amotivation, r =

−.158, p < .001).

Discussion

The univariate distribution was deemed acceptable. No mul-

ticollinearity or singularity was presented in the sample based

on the correlations (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996).

Introjected regulation items were divided into two factors.

But the second items should not be considered healthy eating

behavior. In western countries dieting is considered a healthy

eating style. However, in Japan, young women’s dieting is con-

Y. KATO ET AL.

138

sidered to be a problematic eating behavior (Kiriike, Nagata,

Sirata, & Yamamoto, 1998). Many Japanese females are highly

dissatisfied about their body and have a strong desire to get

slim. Consequently, the rate of thinness in females in Japan is

high and the average Body Mass Index (BMI) is very low (Ka-

tou, Roth, & Maeda, 2010). Since the aim of this study is to

develop a scale that measures the motivation of maintaining a

healthy eating lifestyle, item No. 5 was deleted (see Table 1).

In addition, we added two items to the item group of external

regulation: one was a good indicator to measure the external

regulation, but the other was not. Even if the participant had a

person who assisted her in their healthy eating, that person may

not always insist on her to maintain healthy eating habits.

Therefore, it cannot be an external regulation.

According to Deci and Ryan (1985), the different behavioral

regulatory styles can be differentiated along a continuum that

ranges from non-self-determined styles of regulation to self-

determined ones. The graduation of reasons is a reflection of

the internalization process, where these behavioral regulatory

styles can be differentiated according to their level of self-de-

ermination. Table 2 shows the results of Pearson correlations

among the six subscales. The results support the presence of a

self-determination continuum. The adjacent subscale generally

shows higher correlations than the subscale further along the

continuum. In addition, the subscale at the opposite end of the

continuum has a negative correlation. These results are consis-

tent with a previous study (Pelletier et al., 2004). Thus, internal

consistency of the MHES subscale was verified.

Table 1.

Results of principle factor analyses of the motivation for healthy eating (MHES).

No. Items Factor road Contribution (%)

Intrinsic motivation (α = .81)

16 I like to find new way to create meals that are good for health. .821 57.33

26 It is fun to create meals that are good for my health. .819

**15 I am interested in eating healthy. .782

30 I take pleasure in fixing healthy meals. .781

*1 I am satisfied with eating healthy. .549

Integrated regulation (α = .82)

17 Eating healthy is an integral part of my life. .871 59.33

18 Eating healthy is congruent with other important aspects of my life. .857

**13 Eating healthy is base of my life. .781

14 Regulating my eating behaviors has become a fundamental part of who I am. .706

2 Eating healthy is part of the way I have chosen to live my way. .605

Identified regulation (α = .85)

**12 I believe it will make my mind and body comfortable. .833 62.87

3 I believe it will eventually allow me to feel better. .826

4 It is a way to ensure long-term health benefits. .822

25 I believe it’s a good thing I can do to feel better about myself in general. .771

*19 Not only eat good food, it is a good idea to try to regulate my eating behaviors. .705

Introjected regulation (α = .71)

27 I would feel ashamed of myself if I was not eating healthy. .862 56.79

24 I would be humiliated I was not in control of my eating behaviors. .810

**11 I feel it is shame not to be able to show healthy eating habits. .777

20 I don’t want to be ashamed of how I look. .519

*5 Having healthy diet, and I shall have to maintain optimal weight.

External regulation (α = .77)

23 People around me nag me to do it. .788 53.38

**28 Other people suggestions to keep healthy eating habits. .766

21 Other people close to me will be upset if I don’t. .748

6 Other people close to me insist that I do. .698

7 It is expected of me. .644

**10 I have a person who takes care of my healthy eating.

Amotivation (α = .73)

8 I don’t really know. I truly have the impression that I’m wasting my time trying to regulate my eating behaviors. .831 49.51

9 I can’t really see I’m getting out of it. .831

22 I don’t really know why I bother. .745

29 I don’t know. I can’t see how my efforts to eat healthy are helping my health situation. .574

**31 I think there are more important things to do than to eat healthy. .457

Note: *modified item; **added item.

Y. KATO ET AL.

Table 2.

Pearson correlations among the motivation for healthy eating scale.

2 3 4 5 6

Intrinsic motivation (1) .734 *** .677 *** .349 *** .166 *** −.158 ***

Extrinsic motivation

Integrated regulation (2) .717*** .400 *** .185 *** −.227 ***

Identified regulation (3) .208*** .043n.s. −.301 ***

Introjected regulation (4) .508*** .213 ***

External regulation (5) .420

***

Amotivation (6) 1.000

Note: ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05, n.s.: no significant.

In sum, the results of this first study supported a six-factor

scale structure for the MHES that corresponds to the six regu-

latory styles of behavior hypothesized by Deci and Ryan (1985)

and Ryan and Deci (2000).

Study 2

The purpose of the second study was to further examine the

MHES factorial structure, its psychometric properties, and its

construct validity. In addition, we attempted to test a motiva-

tional model of Healthy Eating behaviors. In agreement with

SDT, it was proposed that comparison between people whose

motivation is intrinsic and those who are merely externally

controlled for an action typically reveal that the former mani-

fest enhanced performance, persistency, and creativity (Deci &

Ryan, 1985). Therefore, self-motivation relates to more positive

and less negative attitudes toward meals. In Japan, the high

frequency of skipping breakfast among young females is con-

sidered to be a problem (Fujiwara, 2003). Thus, in this study,

the relationship between MHES and attitudes toward breakfast

intake were examined. It was hypothesized that self-motivated

healthy eating relates to balanced diet resulting in better subjec-

tive health.

Method

Participants

The MHES and general questions on consciousness of healthy

eating and subjective health status were administered to a sub-

sample of 353 female undergraduate students. The participants

aged between 18 and 23 years (mean 19.6 ± 1.2 years). The

average BMI (kg/m2) for the sample was 20.5 (±2.4). Using

Japanese criteria for obesity, provided by previously published

obesity research (Matuzawa et al., 2000), 12.7% of women

were classified as thin (BMI < 18.5) and 2.8% of women were

classified as obese (BMI ≥ 25). This question was not answered

by 15.0% of women. As with Study 1, with the permission of

professors, subjects completed the questionnaire before the

class. They were informed about the study, and the research

protocol was approved by the University Review Board for

human research in accordance with the ethical standards out-

lined in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. Subjects did not re-

ceive any incentives for participating in this study.

Measures

In addition to MHES, each questionnaire package contained

measures related to consequences associated with the form of

motivation for healthy eating behaviors (e.g., balanced diet and

attitude toward breakfast), as well as indicators of subjective

health status.

Balanced Diet Scale (BDS). Based on the Japanese National

Health and Nutrition Survey’s questionnaire about balanced

diet, this scale was developed by the Ministry of Health, Labour

and Welfare (2005). The BDS includes 13 items with a 4-point

response scale (1 = not at all to 4 = very much). To confirm the

structure of the subscale items principal component analysis

was performed for the BDS.

Attitude toward Breakfast Scale (ABS). To measure the atti-

tude toward breakfast, positive and negative image toward

breakfast and breakfast frequency were questioned. Two food

science experts discussed positive and negative attitudes toward

eating breakfast. Three items each relating to positive image

and negative image were identified. An example for positive

image is “Having breakfast makes me feel fortified”. An exam-

ple for negative image is “I want to sleep rather than eating

breakfast”. Participants responded on a 4-point scale (1 = not at

all to 4 = very much).

Subjective health status (SHS). Concerning subjective health

status a list of 16 physical and emotional symptoms were ad-

ministered. Participants responded on a 4-point scale (1 = not at

all to 4 = very much). To assess the physical state of the par-

ticipants, their weight and height were noted.

Statistical Analyses

To confirm the structural validity of the BDS, ABS, and SHS,

principal component analysis was performed and Cronbach’s

alpha was computed to confirm consistency reliability. Re-

spondent BMI was calculated using the subject’s weight and

height.

Before proceeding with the main analyses of the MHES, pre-

liminary analyses were executed in two steps. First, we calcu-

lated means, standard deviations, floor and ceiling effects (per-

centages of participants with the lowest and the highest possible

scores), and internal consistency reliability using Cronbach’s

alpha for all scales of the MHES.

Construct validity (convergent and divergent validity) was

evaluated by calculating Pearson correlation coefficients be-

tween questionnaire items and subscales. Convergent validity is

demonstrated when scales or items that are thought to measure

the same construct have high correlations. Divergent validity is

demonstrated when items or scales thought to measure different

constructs have low correlations. Criterion validity was tested

by measuring correlation of the MHES domains with the BDS,

ABS, SHS, and BMI domains.

Results

On BDS items, principal component analysis extracted two

factors. The second factor included only one item. Since it was

difficult to keep reliability with one item, this single item was

Y. KATO ET AL.

deleted. The factor analysis of 12 items confirmed a unidi-

mensional structure. The factor loadings for this scale ranged

from .466 to .717. This factor explained 42.59% of the sample

variance. Internal consistency coefficients for the present sam-

ple were acceptable (α = .874). On ABS items, a principal fac-

tor analysis showed one dimension for both scales: positive

image toward breakfast (α = .80; factor load > .818; contribu-

tion rate = 71.91%) and negative image toward breakfast (α

= .73; factor load > .700; contribution rate = 64.78%). On SHS

items, a principal factor analysis showed one dimension for the

scale: subjective health status (α = .89; factor load > .38; con-

tribution rate = 38.34%).

The MHES preliminary analysis was conducted (see Table

3). With the exception of the amotivation subscale (with a high

skewness), the univariate distribution seems acceptable. A log

transformation was used to correct the distribution of the amo-

tivation scale. After transformation, the value of skewness

was .1. This is considered a normal distribution. Ceiling effects

were found in the domain Breakfast frequency scale with

58.1% of participants reporting that they eat breakfast every

day. No floor effects were found. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients

ranged from .73 to .89, indicating a good level of reliability.

Criterion validity between the various domains of the MHES,

Subjective health, and Balanced diet was calculated with Pear-

son correlation coefficients (Table 4). As expected, balanced

diets were more highly correlated with intrinsic motivation.

According to the level of self-determination, the strength of

correlation changed gradually. Finally, balanced diet showed a

negative correlation with amotivation.

As to attitude toward breakfast, positive image toward breakfast

related strongly with intrinsic motivation. The people who en-

joy healthy eating have a positive image toward breakfast. A

negative image toward breakfast related to intrinsic motivation

negatively. Furthermore, not only image but also behavior re-

flected this characteristic. Intrinsic motivation relates to fre-

quency of eating behavior positively and amotivation nega-

tively.

Subjective health status was related to amotivation positively

and related to intrinsic motivation negatively. This implies that

people who are in good physical and psychological condition

have self-determined motivation. In contrast, people in bad

physical and psychological condition tend to not display self-

determined motivation.

Furthermore, correlations between BMI scores and each sub-

scale of the MHES are presented. Apart from identified regula-

tion and introjected regulation, all other subscales relate to BMI

Table 3.

Internal consistency of the subscales of the for Motivation for Healthy Eating Scale.

Domain No. of items N MeanSD Range% at floor% at ceiling Kurtosis Skew-nessα

Intrinsic motivation 5 341 5.0 1.2 1 - 7.3 6.7 −.3 −.3 .82

Extrinsic motivation

Integrated regulation 5 342 5.2 1.2 1 - 7.3 7.9 −.4 .0 .82

Identified regulation 5 341 5.7 1.1 1 - 7.3 15.0 −.7 .2 .86

Introjected regulation 4 336 3.4 1.4 1 - 74.8 2.5 .4 .0 .75

External regulation 5 338 3.0 1.2 1 - 75.1 1.4 .7 .6 .76

Amotivation 5 341 2.6 1.0 1 - 73.1 1.1 1.4 3.0 .74

Balanced diet 12 345 1.8 .5 0 - 3.3 2.0 −.5 .5 .87

Attitudes towards breakfast

Positive attitude towards breakfast 3 348 2.8 .7 1 - 41.4 13.9 −.1 −.2 .80

Negative attitude towards breakfast 3 348 2.1 .7 1 - 415 1.1 .3 −.5 .73

Breakfast frequency 1 348 4.3 2 0 - 5.3 58.1 .0 .1 ‐

Subjective health status 16 350 2.2 .6 1 - 4.8 .3 −.1 −.1 .89

Table 4.

Correlation between the MHES subscales and related constructs (subjective health status and conscious of healthy eating).

Extrinsic motivation

Intrinsic motivation

Integrated regulationIdentified regulationIntrojected regulation External regulation

Amotivation

Balanced diet .538 *** .474

*** .371 *** .224 *** .004 n.s. −.154 **

Attitude towards breakfast

Positive image towards breakfast .464 *** .375

*** .387 *** .122 * −.002 n.s. −.206 ***

Negative image towards breakfast −.209 *** −.159 ** −.140 * −.004 n.s. .146 ** .270***

Frequency of eating breakfast .198 *** .163 ** .107 n.s. .006 n.s. −.032 n.s. −.127 *

Subjective health status −.170 ** −.130 * −.069 n.s. .044 n.s. .139 * .149**

BMI −.119 * −.167 ** −.094 n.s. −.106 n.s. −.217 *** −.162 **

Note: ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05, n.s.: no significant.

140

Y. KATO ET AL.

negatively. This result is different from the previous study

(Pelletier et al., 2004). In western cultures obesity is a severe

problem. However, in Japan, thinness in young females is re-

garded as a problem. These cultural differences need to be con-

sidered in cross-cultural research since it may affect the results.

Our data confirmed the psychometric properties and the va-

lidity of the Japanese-language MHES. Thus, this questionnaire

can be used for eating behavior investigation on young Japa-

nese females.

Discussion

Questionnaires developed for evaluating outcomes in differ-

ent cultures, and translations thereof, need to be carefully vali-

dated in a target population. The validation of Japanese fe-

male-reported measures is important, since the quality of life

construct differs cross-culturally. This study of the psychomet-

ric properties of the Japanese version of the MHES in a sample

of 357 Japanese females indicated that the psychometric prop-

erties of the questionnaire were acceptable. The MHES do-

mains showed good reliability with Cronbach’s alpha coeffi-

cients above the accepted standard of .70.

Criterion validity between the various domains of the MHES

and the BDS, ABS, and SHS were demonstrated with Pearson

correlation coefficients. As expected, the self-determined regu-

latory styles were more highly related to good eating attitudes

than less self-determined regulatory styles. For example, con-

vergent and divergent validity showed that the correlation be-

tween good attitude such as intrinsic motivation and balanced

diet (r = .538) is higher than related scales such as integrated

motivation and balanced diet (r = .47). The result indicates that

the more individuals perform self-determined regulatory style

toward their eating behaviors, the more they have healthy eat-

ing attitudes.

Our study has certain limitations to generalize data, which

could be due to the small sample size considered. In the previ-

ous study, Pelletier et al. confirmed the value of the self-de-

termination construct in long-term adherence to healthier die-

tary behavior change, but in this study, we could not research

about the sustainable effects that influence biological health

indicators (e.g., blood lipid parameters).

Our data confirm the psychometric properties and the valid-

ity of the Japanese version of MHES. Thus, this questionnaire

can be used in Japanese female samples. In the future this scale

will be expected to clarify the factors that foster motivation for

healthy eating in Japanese population.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Re-

search (C) JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 23500945.

REFERENCES

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York:

Plenum Press. doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-4446-9

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-de-

termination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.

Fujiwara, T. (2003). Skipping breakfast is associated with dysmenor-

rhea in young women in Japan. International Journal of Food Sci-

ences and Nutrition, 54, 505-509.

doi:10.1080/09637480310001622369

Katou, Y., Roth, R., & Maeda, K. (2010). Eating behavior and body

image in Austrian and Japanese students. Families and societies in

transition. Proceedings of 66th Annual Convention International

Council of Psychologists, 237-249.

Kiriike, N., Nagata, T., Sirata, K., & Yamamoto, N. (1998). Are young

women in Japan at high risk for eating disorders? Decreased BMI in

young females from 1960 to 1995. Psychiatry and Clinical Neuro-

sciences, 52, 279-281. doi:10.1046/j.1440-1819.1998.00387.x

Pelletier, L. G., Dion, Angelo, S. C., Slovinec-D’Angelo, M., & Reid,

R. (2004). Why do you regulate what you eat? Relationships between

forms of regulation, eating behaviors, sustained dietary behavior

change, and psychological adjustment. Motivation and Emotion, 28,

245-277.

Matuzawa, Y., Inoue, S., Ikeda, Y., Sakata, T., Saito Y., Sato, Y., Shirai,

K., Ono, M., Miyazaki, S., Tokunaga, M., Hukagawa, K., Yama-

nouchi, K., & Nakamura, T. (2000). New criteria for determination

overweight and obesity. Obesity Resea rc h, 6, 18-28.

Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (2005) Outline of the results

from 2007 national health and nutrition survey. URL (last checked 7

June 2011).

http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/wp/wp-hw3/dl/2-064_065.pdf

Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. R. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and

internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Jour-

nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749-761.

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.749

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the

facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development and well-be-

ing. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.

doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Tabachinick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics.

New York: Harper Collins College.