Etiology of Eating Disorders in Woman
Etiology of Eating Disorders in Woman
Striegel-Moore, Cachelin
PSYCHOLOGIST
/ ETIOLOGY OF
/ September
EDS 2001
Etiology of Eating Disorders in Women
Ruth H. Striegel-Moore
Wesleyan University
Fary M. Cachelin
California State University, Los Angeles
Eating disorders have been studied extensively over the past several decades, yet
research of their etiology has lagged behind treatment outcome research. This article
reviews the challenges inherent in this research. It illustrates the epidemiologic designs
that have been used to test risk factor hypotheses and describes the major studies
designed to answer the question of what causes eating disorders. It points to significant
gaps in knowledge, chief among them the absence of representative data on prevalence
and correlates of eating disorders, and the lack of data regarding eating disorders in eth-
nic minority populations.
Eating disorders (EDs) pose a considerable threat to the health and well-
being of adolescent girls and adult women. Compared to other major psychi-
atric disorders, EDs have been introduced into the psychiatric nomenclature
relatively recently and, consequently, research is less advanced and major
gaps of knowledge remain. Anorexia nervosa (AN) was described as a new
disease in the late 19th century by the British psychiatrist Gull (1888) and the
French physician Laseque (1873/1964). Both shared the view that AN was a
“nervous disease,” yet their clinical descriptions were quite different. Gull
focused extensively on the physiological correlates of the disorder, asserting
that this disorder involved “simple starvation.” He attributed the disorder to a
“perversion of the will” without paying attention to the causes of this “perver-
sion” or the psychological symptoms that factor prominently into today’s
classification of AN. Laseque classified AN as a “hysteria of the gastric cen-
ter.” He proposed that “emotional distress” played a major causal role and
that family dynamics added further to the risk for or maintenance of the disor-
der. Despite these differences, treatment by both physicians focused on nutri-
tional rehabilitation, essentially reducing a mental disorder to a somatic
problem. The formulation of AN as a medical disease remained dominant
until Hilde Bruch (1973, 1978) introduced her biopsychosocial theory that
emphasized the role of developmental factors and family dynamics.
Ruth H. Striegel-Moore was supported in part by a grant from the National Institute of Mental
Health and the National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01 MH57897).
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Ruth H. Striegel-Moore, Depart-
ment of Psychology, Wesleyan University, 207 High Street, Middletown, CT 06459; e-mail:
[email protected].
THE COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGIST, Vol. 29 No. 5, September 2001 635-661
© 2001 by the Division of Counseling Psychology.
635
Despite considerable growth in research of EDs over the past two decades,
etiological research still lags behind other productive areas such as treatment
outcome research. There is a voluminous literature that claims to speak to the
question of what factors cause AN or BN, yet closer reading reveals that
many of these studies fail to address the fundamental scientific principle that
to show cause and effect, the causal variable has to precede in time the out-
come variable of interest. As described in detail by Kraemer et al. (1997), eti-
ological research requires that one differentiate between correlates,
concomitants, and risk factors. A correlate is any factor associated with the
outcome. Correlational studies have identified a myriad of variables that are
associated with EDs. These studies have served as the starting point for more
recent research, where methodologies have been used that permit distinction
of concomitants and risk factors. A concomitant is a variable that has been
shown to be associated significantly with the outcome and to not have pre-
ceded the outcome (e.g., low serum potassium level in BN). A risk factor is a
variable that has been shown to precede the outcome (e.g., childhood sexual
abuse). If the risk factor cannot be changed, it is considered a fixed marker
(e.g., sex); if the risk factor can be shown to change spontaneously or to be
changeable, it is considered a variable risk factor (e.g., body image con-
cerns). If it can be shown that manipulation of the risk factor changes the risk
of the outcome, then this variable risk factor is a causal risk factor.
This typology provides a useful framework and has important implica-
tions for risk management (primary and secondary prevention). Fixed mark-
ers are unchanging characteristics and as such are easiest to measure (e.g.,
timing of measurement is not important). Fixed markers typically are identi-
fied long before causal risk factors are. Variable risk factors are more difficult
to measure because they may change. Ideally, such variables should be mea-
sured repeatedly and close in time to when they are likely to occur (to ensure
accurate recall). Data about fixed markers are helpful for developing cost-
effective screening procedures, because fixed markers point to populations
likely to contain cases. Identifying variable risk factors is essential for devel-
oping interventions aimed at reducing the prevalence of EDs.
Previous integrative reviews have summarized the literature that describes
correlates of AN (Bemis, 1978), BN (Striegel-Moore, Silberstein, & Rodin,
1986), and BED (Yanovski, 1993). A recent review summarized the studies
on biological abnormalities in AN and BN (Ferguson & Pigott, 2000). The
authors noted that although there is considerable evidence of alterations in
neurotransmitter and neuroendocrine function in women with EDs, it is not
known whether the abnormalities identified precede the disorder, are conse-
quences of malnutrition and disordered eating, or are permissive factors that
maintain the ED once it has developed. These reviews require no detailed
updates, as subsequent studies have added little new information regarding
correlates. Therefore, the present article primarily will review a second gen-
eration of studies: investigations that provide data regarding risk factors for
EDs. Several methodological challenges inherent to this research, including
case definition, low base rates, and multifactorial causation of EDs, are con-
sidered next.
METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES
IN RISK FACTOR RESEARCH
Classification of EDs
Since their introduction, criteria for AN and BN have been modified with
every revision of the DSM. These revisions primarily have focused on sever-
ity criteria. As is the case for many other psychiatric disorders, classification
of EDs is complicated by the fact that the core symptoms occur along a sever-
ity continuum, and some of the symptoms (e.g., body image concerns, diet-
ing) are widely prevalent in the female population. The challenge of classifi-
cation is to strike a balance between selecting criteria that are (a) not so
restrictive as to exclude cases that may not evidence all features of the
prototypical expression of the disorder, yet share its essential features; and
(b) not so inclusive as to encompass cases in which the symptom picture does
not appear to be clinically significant. The current DSM-IV diagnostic crite-
ria have been criticized because a majority of individuals who request treat-
ment do not meet criteria for AN or BN (for a review, see Striegel-Moore &
Marcus, 1995). The boundaries that separate EDs from healthy status are
established by severity criteria that have no basis in empirical research. As
described by Kendler (1999), efforts to validate syndromes by use of a “clini-
cal impairment” criterion cannot fully resolve the boundary dilemma
because in practice it proves difficult to establish that dysfunction or disabil-
ity is due to a particular disorder. Moreover, many risk factors for psychiatric
disorders in turn are associated with impairment (e.g., Walker et al., 1999).
The impact of the changing diagnostic criteria on our understanding of risk
factors for EDs has not yet been examined empirically. Even studies with
identical diagnostic criteria have utilized different research instruments to
determine case status. These methodological variations can be expected to
affect diagnosis of BN and BED in particular, because with respect to clinical
features there is considerable overlap between these two disorders (Striegel-
Moore et al., in press). Standardized assessment methods are needed to per-
mit clear comparisons across studies (Regier et al., 1998). Kendler’s group
has illustrated the importance of diagnostic definition for the assessment of
risk: Heritability estimates have varied widely with varying definitions of BN
(for discussion, see Fairburn, Cowen, & Harrison, in press).
The relationships between AN and BN, between AN binge-eating/
purging type and BN, and between BN and BED remain poorly defined. A
The fact that EDs are relatively rare poses a major challenge to risk factor
research. For example, the Epidemiological Catchment Area Study (ECA)
found only 11 cases in a nationally representative sample of more than
20,000 adult women and men (Robins et al., 1984). There is no database in
the United States that would permit an estimate of the prevalence of BN in a
nationally representative sample. (The ECA was initiated before BN was
introduced into the DSM; therefore, screening questions did not capture
bulimic symptoms.) A Canadian study, recruiting a representative sample of
3,831 male and 4,285 female residents of Ontario (aged 15 to 65), identified
only 62 cases of BN (more than 90% of them female) (Garfinkel et al., 1995,
1996). In the Oregon Adolescent Depression Project, to date the largest epi-
demiological study of adolescents in the United States that included diagnos-
tic questions regarding EDs, none of the 2,564 boys met lifetime criteria for
AN and only 1 was diagnosed with a history of BN (DSM-III). Among the
2,544 girls, 12 and 17 met lifetime criteria for AN and BN, respectively
(Lewinsohn, Hops, Roberts, Seeley, & Andrews, 1993). Clearly, population-
based efforts at locating an adequate number of cases require screening very
large samples. The effort and cost in obtaining a representative sample of
people with EDs are substantial.
Because of the low rates of AN and BN among males (only about 10% of
cases of AN or BN are male), data about risk for developing an ED in males
are especially limited and will not be the focus of this article. The gender
imbalance regarding prevalence is less pronounced in BED, yet most studies
of BED also have focused on female populations. There is an interesting par-
adox regarding gender and EDs: Despite the clear emphasis on female popu-
lations in research, the question of why women (Striegel-Moore et al., 1986)
are so much more at risk than men has become increasingly less prominent in
theoretical and empirical work. Current risk factor research tends to be pre-
sented without explicit reference to biological sex or gender roles as impor-
tant explanatory variables. Theoretical models and empirical studies of EDs
need to encompass a consideration of risk related to female biological pro-
cesses and the role of gender in the sociocultural context.
Because EDs are relatively uncommon, many studies have relied solely on
patient samples. Sampling biases in use of patients have been shown in epide-
miological studies (e.g., Kessler, Olfson, & Berglund, 1998). To date, only
two studies have examined bias in patient samples (Fairburn, Welch, Nor-
man, O’Connor, & Doll, 1996; Wilfley, Pike, Dohm, Striegel-Moore, &
Fairburn, in press). A study in Oxford, England, found that parental obesity
and parental drug abuse were significantly less common among clinic
patients than among community cases with BN (Fairburn et al., 1996), sug-
gesting sampling bias may influence results regarding the role of certain risk
factors.
The overreliance on patient samples has contributed to the perception that
EDs are limited to European American populations. A recent study found
that a significantly greater number of African American women responded to
a community-based risk factor study than to a treatment study for BED, even
though these studies were conducted concurrently in the same geographic
area and used similar advertisement strategies (Wilfley et al., in press). This
finding suggests that relying solely on patient samples may result in the inad-
vertent exclusion of ethnic minority groups.
EDs are widely seen as disorders of European American females, and girls
or women from ethnic minority groups are believed to be protected from
developing AN or BN (Striegel-Moore & Smolak, 1996). There is emerging
evidence, however, that ethnic minority groups experience ED symptoms
(for reviews, see Crago, Shisslak, & Estes, 1996; Striegel-Moore & Smolak,
2000), and risk factors unique to ethnic minority group status (e.g., accultura-
tion, immigration-related stresses, discrimination) need to be considered in
culturally sensitive models of risk. To date, scientific evidence regarding the
prevalence of EDs (and risk factors for developing AN or BN) is too limited
to permit conclusive statements about risk for EDs among ethnic minority
groups. In light of the low rates of EDs, epidemiological studies will need to
oversample individuals from ethnic minority populations to ensure adequate
statistical power for testing hypotheses regarding ethnicity as a risk factor for
developing an ED.
Risk Is Multifactorial
increased in linear fashion from individuals exposed to the fewest risk factors
to those exposed to the most factors.
Investigators have implemented a variety of research designs to test risk
factor models of EDs: cross-sectional population surveys, family studies,
twin studies, case-control studies, and prospective cohort studies. Not all
designs are equally well suited for examining a particular risk domain, and
multiple designs are needed to accommodate the challenges described above
(Zahner, Hsieh, & Fleming, 1995). The next section describes each of these
designs and reviews exemplary studies representing the particular method-
ological approaches. Organizing the literature in terms of the design features
of the risk factor studies allows an emphasis on the specific contributions of
the studies to our understanding of risk. To aid a coherent integration of
research findings within a multifactorial framework, Table 1 summarizes the
major findings by risk domain and study design.
TABLE 1: Risk Factor Variables (by domain) and Corresponding Study Design(s)
Demographic characteristics
Sex AN, BN Survey, family study, twin study
Age AN, BN Survey
Birth cohort BN Survey, prospective cohort
Parental socioeconomic status AN, BN Survey, twin study
Sociocultural context
Acculturation m.s. Survey
Familial interpersonal and context
Frequent house moves n.s. Case-control
Inadequate parenting AN, BN, BED Case-control
Parental psychopathology BN Family studies, case-control
Abuse (sexual, physical) AN, BN, BED Case-control, survey
Conflicted relationships with parents DE Prospective cohort
Parental high expectations BN Case-control
Parental concern with weight/eating AN, BN, BED Case-control
Familial eating disorders AN, BN, BED Family studies, twin studies,
case-control
Parental obesity BN Case-control
No close friends AN, BN Case-control
Bullied by other children BN, BED Case-control
Constitutional vulnerability
Premature birth AN Twin studies
Severe health problems AN, BN Case-control
Childhood obesity/body fat AN, BN, BED Case-control, prospective study
Early onset of menarche BN, DE Case-control, prospective study
Pregnancy (prior to onset) BN, BED Case-control
Perfectionism AN, BN, BED Case-control, prospective study
Personal vulnerability
Psychopathology AN, BN, BED Case-control, prospective study
Negative affectivity BN, BED Case-control, prospective study
Social self disturbance BN Case-control, prospective study
Low self-esteem AN, BN, BED Case-control, prospective study
Internalized thin ideal DE Prospective study
Body image concerns DE Case-control, prospective study
Dieting DE Prospective study
NOTE: AN = anorexia nervosa, BN = bulimia nervosa, BED = binge eating disorder, DE = disor-
dered eating, m.s. = mixed support, n.s. = not significant.
1993; Whitaker, 1992), survey studies are based on adult samples (van
Hoeken, Lucas, & Hoek, 1998). To date, population surveys contain too few
individuals from ethnic minority populations to be useful for answering the
question of whether ethnicity is a risk factor for developing an ED or whether
there are certain risk factors that are unique to some ethnic groups.
Cross-sectional population surveys have reported three consistent find-
ings. One, EDs are relatively uncommon. Two, AN and BN are significantly
more likely to occur in females than in males. Hence, female sex is accepted
as a fixed marker for AN and BN. Three, AN or BN cases tend to be younger
than individuals who do not have an ED, a result that reflects two separate risk
factors: age and birth cohort. Onset of AN and BN has been shown to occur
during adolescence or young adulthood (e.g., Newman et al., 1996), and
younger cohorts have been found to have higher rates of EDs than older
cohorts (e.g., Bushnell, Wells, Hornblow, Oakley-Browne, & Joyce, 1990).
One recent population survey (Garfinkel et al., 1995, 1996) illustrates the
contributions of this design to understanding risk for EDs. By design, this
Canadian study did not select participants on the basis of their disease status.
Hence, an important, unique contribution of this study was that it permitted
comparisons between full-syndrome (FS) and partial-syndrome (PS) cases
regarding exposure to risk factors. Women with FS-AN did not differ signifi-
cantly from women with PS-AN (defined as meeting all criteria except for
amenorrhea) on rates of parental psychopathology or childhood sexual
abuse. The similar risk factor profiles of FS-AN and PS-AN cases supports
those who have called for the elimination of amenorrhea as a defining symp-
tom of AN in women (Cachelin & Maher, 1998; Garfinkel et al., 1996;
Striegel-Moore & Marcus, 1995). Comparisons of women with PS-BN
(defined as meeting all but the binge frequency criterion) and FS-BN also
revealed no significant differences in exposure to the risk factors of parental
psychopathology and childhood sexual abuse between the two groups. Based
on these results, Garfinkel and colleagues (1995) suggested that the fre-
quency criterion of two binge episodes per week was not supported empiri-
cally and that PS-BN and FS-BN reflect different levels of severity of a com-
mon spectrum disorder.
Acculturation becomes a variable of interest and importance when exam-
ining disordered eating in women of various ethnicities. Exposure to and
adoption of Western values concerning attractiveness and thinness have been
proposed as primary risk factors for the development of EDs (e.g., Striegel-
Moore et al., 1986); acculturation level is one way to measure exposure to and
adoption of U.S. social values. To date, research is preliminary (e.g., no study
has used a representative sample) and results are inconsistent. Some
researchers have reported a significant positive relationship between higher
acculturation level and increased disordered eating (e.g., Cachelin, Veisel,
Family Studies
Family studies represent the first step in a systematic progression of
genetic epidemiologic research, permitting an answer to the question of
whether a disorder is familial (i.e., runs in families). Evidence of familial
aggregation then leads to a series of subsequent questions (requiring different
designs), such as the extent to which the transmission can be attributed to
genetic versus environmental factors and what mechanisms underlie the
familial aggregation. The family study design involves identifying a case
sample (probands), a control sample of individuals who do not have the target
disorder, and a corresponding sample of relatives (most commonly first-
degree relatives) of these probands and their controls. By interviewing rela-
tives directly to ascertain psychiatric diagnoses, the family study generates
more accurate estimates of familial aggregation than the family history
method (which involves interviewing the probands about disorders in their
relatives). Moreover, controls must be recruited from the same population as
the probands. This requirement can be difficult to achieve, given that many
family studies are carried out with probands who are patients at university-
based treatment centers that attract patients from well beyond the immediate
community surrounding the treatment center. Last, interviewers conducting
the assessment of the relatives need to be blind regarding the diagnostic status
of the proband.
A review of family studies illustrates that with one exception (involving a
very small sample), each study found more first-degree relatives with an ED
among the families of probands with AN or BN than among the relatives of
control probands (Lilenfeld & Kaye, 1998). An important finding of these
family studies concerns the coaggregation of AN and BN among the relatives
of AN and BN probands. Specifically, these studies have shown that among
Twin Studies
Twin studies offer the opportunity of exploring the genetic and environ-
mental contributions to the etiology of EDs. Because monozygotic (MZ)
twins are genetically identical, discordances regarding a trait or disorder
observed in MZ twins can be attributed to environmental factors. Dizygotic
(DZ) twins, in contrast, share no more genetic similarity than nontwin sib-
lings. The goal of the classic twin study is to compare similarities and differ-
Case-Control Studies
The case-control design involves selecting participants who do (cases)
and who do not (controls) have the disorder of which the etiology is to be
studied. Controls need to be sampled from the same population from which
the cases arise and need to be matched on variables known to affect exposure
history (e.g., gender, age, socioeconomic status). The two groups are com-
two groups. These results need to be interpreted cautiously, given that the two
groups were different in regard to age, education, and the time period used for
establishing exposure to risk.
There were no significant differences between the women with BED and
women with BN on any of the various risk factors under investigation; how-
ever, women with BN were exposed to a greater number of risk factors than
women with BED. If this finding is replicated in other studies, it supports the
view that BED is not distinct in etiology from BN.
In summary, case-control studies have provided support for a number of
risk domains contributing to the development of EDs. This design involves
retrospective data about risk exposure; hence, results need to be confirmed in
prospective studies. Research needs to examine how multiple risk factors
interact to cause EDs and whether these risk factors hold for ethnic minority
women.
the pathways of risk. Students entered the study in grades 7 to 10 and partici-
pated for 3 consecutive years. Variables examined were BMI, pubertal devel-
opment, and personality characteristics. Risk status (high, moderate, mini-
mal, none/control) was determined at each year based on scores on the Eating
Disorder Inventory (Garner, Olmsted, & Polivy, 1983) and an ED checklist of
related behaviors and attitudes. Multiple regression analyses indicated that
for both genders, the strongest predictors of Year 3 risk status were Year 1 and
Year 2 risk scores. When the effects of Year 1 and Year 2 risk were controlled,
ethnicity (White) and poor interoceptive awareness at Year 2 were significant
predictors of disordered eating at Year 3 for girls. Previous risk status was the
only significant predictor of Year 3 risk for boys. The researchers pointed out
that the fact that the strongest predictors of Year 3 risk were Years 1 and 2 risk
scores suggests that when disordered eating becomes a strong pattern, these
habits override individual or group differences in personality, behavior, and
attitudes (Leon et al., 1995). What factors preceded initial risk status at Year 1
for girls or boys remains unclear.
In each of the prospective studies reviewed here, the significant predictor
variable is defined in such as way as to overlap with core symptoms of EDs
(e.g., weight and shape concern and dieting). Hence, the predictor variable is
confounded with the outcome variable of interest, and these studies may be
understood potentially as describing the early course of an ED. This does not
diminish the value of these studies for prevention planning. Clearly, in female
adolescents, weight concerns and dieting increase risk for the exacerbation of
disordered eating over time.
The relationships between obesity and dieting and between obesity and
binge eating appear to be bidirectional. Obesity and dieting have been shown
to predict onset of binge eating in the studies reviewed thus far. However,
dieting and binge eating also have been shown to predict increases in adipos-
ity (Stice & Agras, 1998; Stice, Cameron, et al., 1999). For example, Stice,
Cameron, et al. (1999) examined the prospective relations of weight-reduc-
tion efforts to increases in adiposity and obesity onset in a sample of 692
female adolescents over the course of 4 years. They found that dieting and
binge eating predicted greater weight increase, even when controlling for ini-
tial weight. Perhaps EDs such as BN and BED are the result of a vicious cycle
in which initial efforts to achieve thinness contribute to the onset of disor-
dered eating, which in turn leads to greater weight gain and intensified body
dissatisfaction, prompting an intensification of disordered eating to the point
at which some individuals develop full-syndrome BN or BED.
A recent study examined prospectively the relationship between maternal
and infant characteristics (maternal weight history, maternal eating attitudes
and behaviors, infant birth weight, and infant sucking behavior) and onset of
problem eating in children (Stice, Agras, & Hammer, 1999). Maternal BMI
Our review suggests several conclusions. Family and twin studies clearly
show that EDs aggregate in families, and research now is needed to elucidate
the mechanisms that underlie this association. Multiple designs will be
needed to explain the significantly elevated risk for EDs among females who
have a relative with an ED. On one hand, genetic research may identify the
genes involved in causing EDs. On the other hand, the phenotypic expression
of a genetic vulnerability is expressed in a particular context. Studies investi-
gating twin pairs who are discordant for an ED may help address the question
of why one twin is protected from developing the disorder even though her
twin sister has developed an ED. This review further illustrates that many of
the personal vulnerability factors have been identified using the case-control
design. Prospective studies are needed to confirm the etiologic significance
of these factors. In addition, for modifiable risk variables, experimental stud-
ies such as randomized prevention trials may help clarify the role of personal
vulnerability factors such as low self-esteem or body dissatisfaction. Despite
their great promise, prospective studies have been underutilized, and results
have been limited by the relatively small sample sizes involved in published
studies. The cost involved in carrying out longitudinal studies over a long
time period are considerable, and researchers may need to enlist public sup-
port to generate the interest and resolve needed to commit major resources
toward a better understanding of these disorders.
This review also has identified several major gaps in research. The most
pressing gap is the lack of nationally representative epidemiologic data. A
second, related gap concerns the dearth of data about EDs in ethnic minority
populations. These populations may experience several risk factors that have
not yet been examined with adequate scientific rigor. For example, case
reports describe the acculturation pressures experienced by upwardly mobile
ethnic minority women to adopt a thin body as a way of “fitting in” with
majority culture. A third gap concerns the question of how to define the syn-
dromes of EDs so that they have maximum clinical utility and validity. If risk
factor studies require inclusion of full-syndrome cases (as presently defined),
this poses a serious challenge to certain designs (e.g., prospective cohort
study) because of the costs involved in establishing and following large
cohorts over extended periods of time. Hence, research is needed to deter-
mine how broadly syndromes may be defined to still represent valid variants
of the spectrum of AN, BN, and BED. Moreover, researchers need to move
toward studies in which the entire range of risk domains is measured ade-
quately and the various risk factors can be considered within an integrative
framework. Needed especially are studies that incorporate biological vari-
ables along with other risk factors. Last, the ultimate goal of risk factor
research is to provide data that permit identification of high-risk groups (for
targeted prevention) and development of interventions aimed at eliminating
sources of risk or mediating their impact on those who are exposed. Given the
multitude and complexity of risk factors described in this review, the search
for risk factors needs to be informed by consideration of the distinction of
fixed and modifiable risk factors (Kraemer et al., 1997) and the determination
of the public health benefits of particular preventive interventions versus
early therapeutic interventions.
To date, clinically proven treatments have focused primarily on the per-
sonal vulnerability factors of body image dissatisfaction and dieting (cogni-
tive behavioral therapy) and social self deficits (interpersonal psychother-
apy) (for review, see Whittal, Agras, & Gould, 1999). As noted by Ferguson
and Pigott (2000) and Mitchell (in press), the role of pharmacotherapy
remains limited in the treatment of AN. Moreover, pharmacological treat-
REFERENCES
American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disor-
ders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Bemis, K. M. (1978). Current approaches to the etiology and treatment of anorexia nervosa. Psy-
chological Bulletin, 85(3), 593-617.
Bordo, S. (1993). Unbearable weight: Feminism, Western culture, and the body. Berkeley: Uni-
versity of California Press.
Boskind-Lodahl, M. (1976). Cinderella’s stepsisters: A feminist perspective on anorexia
nervosa and bulimia. Signs, 2, 342-356.
Bruch, H. (1973). Eating disorders: Obesity, anorexia nervosa and the person within. New York:
Basic Books.
Bruch, H. (1978). The golden cage: The enigma of anorexia nervosa. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Bulik, C. M., Sullivan, P. F., Fear, J., & Pickering, A. (1997). Predictors of the development of
bulimia nervosa in women with anorexia nervosa. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Dis-
ease, 185, 704-707.
Bulik, C. M., Sullivan, P. F., & Kendler, K. S. (1998). Heritability of binge-eating and broadly
defined bulimia nervosa. Biological Psychiatry, 44, 1210-1218.
Bulik, C. M., Sullivan, P. F., Wade, T. D., & Kendler, K. S. (2000). Twin studies of eating disor-
ders: A review. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 27, 1-20.
Bushnell, J. A., Wells, J. E., Hornblow, A. R., Oakley-Browne, M. A., & Joyce, P. (1990). Preva-
lence of three bulimia syndromes in the general population. Psychological Medicine, 20,
671-680.
Cachelin, F. M., & Maher, B. A. (1998). Is amenorrhea a critical criterion for anorexia nervosa.
Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 44, 435-440.
Cachelin, F. M., Veisel, C., Striegel-Moore, R. H., & Barzegarnazari, E. (in press). Disordered
eating, acculturation, and treatment seeking in a community sample of Hispanic, Asian,
Black, and White women. Psychology of Women Quarterly.
Chernin, K. (1985). The hungry self: Women, eating, and identity. New York: Harper & Row.
Cnattingius, S., Hultman, C. M., Dahl, M., & Sparen, P. (1999). Very preterm birth, birth trauma,
and the risk of anorexia nervosa among girls. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 634-638.
Crago, M., Shisslak, C. M., & Estes, L. S. (1996). Eating disturbances among American minor-
ity groups. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 19, 239-248.
Davis, C., & Katzman, M. A. (1999). Perfection as acculturation: Psychological correlates of
eating problems in Chinese male and female students living in the United States. Interna-
tional Journal of Eating Disorders, 25, 65-70.
Fairburn, C. G., & Beglin, S. J. (1990). Studies of the epidemiology of bulimia nervosa. Ameri-
can Journal of Psychiatry, 4, 402-408.
Fairburn, C. G., Cooper, Z., Doll, H. A., & Welch, S. L. (1999). Risk factors for anorexia nervosa:
Three integrated case-control comparisons. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 468-476.
Fairburn, C. G., Cowen, P. J., & Harrison, P. J. (in press). Twin studies and the etiology of eating
disorders. International Journal of Eating Disorders.
Fairburn, C. G., Doll, H. A., Welch, S. L., Hay, P. J., Davies, B. A., & O’Connor, M. E. (1998).
Risk factors for binge eating disorder: A community-based, case-control study. Archives of
General Psychiatry, 55, 425-432.
Fairburn, C. G., Welch, S. L., Doll, H. A., Davies, B. A., & O’Connor, M. E. (1997). Risk factors
for bulimia nervosa. Archives of General Psychology, 54, 509-517.
Fairburn, C. G., Welch, S. L., Norman, P. A., O’Connor, M. E., & Doll, H. A. (1996). Bias and
bulimia nervosa: How typical are clinic cases? American Journal of Psychiatry, 153, 386-
391.
Ferguson C. P., & Pigott, T. A. (2000). Anorexia and bulimia nervosa: Neurobiology and
pharmacotherapy. Behavior Therapy, 31, 237-263.
Furukawa, T. (1994). Weight changes and eating attitudes of Japanese adolescents under
acculturative stresses: A prospective study. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 15,
71-79.
Garfinkel, P. E., & Garner, D. M. (1982). Anorexia nervosa and bulimia. New York: Brunner/
Mazel.
Garfinkel, P. E., Lin, E., Goering, P., Spegg, C., Goldbloom, D. S., Kennedy, S., Kaplan, A. S., &
Woodside, D. B. (1995). Bulimia nervosa in a Canadian community sample: Prevalence and
comparison of subgroups. American Journal of Psychiatry, 152(7), 1052-1058.
Garfinkel, P. E., Lin, E., Goering, P., Spegg, C., Goldbloom, D., Kennedy, S., Kaplan, A. S., &
Woodside, D. B. (1996). Should amenorrhea be necessary for the diagnosis of anorexia
nervosa? British Journal of Psychiatry, 168, 500-506.
Garner, D. M., & Garfinkel, P. E. (1985). Anorexia nervosa: A multidimensional perspective.
New York: Guilford.
Garner, D. M., Olmsted, M. P., & Polivy J. (1983). The development and validation of a multidi-
mensional eating disorder inventory for anorexia nervosa and bulimia. International Journal
of Eating Disorders, 2, 15-34.
Graber, J. A., Brooks-Gunn, J., Paikoff, R. L., & Warren, M. P. (1994). Prediction of eating prob-
lems: An 8-year study of adolescent girls. Developmental Psychology, 30, 823-834.
Gull, W. (1888). Anorexia nervosa. Lancet, 1, 516-517.
Hettema, J. M., Neale, M. C., & Kendler, K. S. (1995). Physical similarity and the equal-
environment assumption in twin studies of psychiatric disorders. Behavior Genetics, 25,
327-335.
Joiner, G. W., & Kashubeck, S. (1996). Acculturation, body image, self-esteem, and eating-dis-
order symptomatology in adolescent Mexican American women. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 20, 419-435.
Kendler, K. S. (1999). Setting boundaries for psychiatric disorders. American Journal of Psychi-
atry, 156, 1845-1848.
Kendler, K. S., MacLean C., Neale, M., Kessler, R., Heath, A., & Eaves, L. (1991). The genetic
epidemiology of bulimia nervosa. American Journal of Psychiatry, 148, 1627-1637.
Kessler, R. C., Olfson, M.P.H., & Berglund, P. A. (1998). Patterns and predictors of treatment
contact after first onset of psychiatric disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry, 155, 62-69.
Killen, J. D., Taylor, C. B., Hayward, C., Haydel, F. H., Wilson, D., Hammer, L., Kraemer, H.,
Blair-Greiner, A., & Strachowski, D. (1996). Weight concerns influence the development of
eating disorders: A 4-year prospective study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
64, 936-940.
Killen, J. D., Taylor, C. B., Hayward, C., Wilson, D. M., Haydel, K. F., Hammer, L. D.,
Simmonds, B., Robinson, T. N., Litt, I., Varady, A., & Kraemer, H. (1994). Pursuit of thin-
ness and onset of eating disorder symptoms in a community sample of adolescent girls: A
three-year prospective analysis. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 16, 227-238.
Klump, K. L., Holly, A., Iacono, W. G., McGue, M., & Wilson, L. E. (2000). Physical similarity
and twin resemblance for eating disorders: A test of the equal environment assumption.
Behavior Genetics, 30, 51-58.
Kraemer, H. C. (1997). What is the “right” statistical measure of twin concordance (or diagnostic
reliability and validity)? Archives of General Psychiatry, 54, 1121-1124.
Kraemer, H. C., Kazdin, A. E., Offord, D. R., Kessler, R. C., Jensen, P. S., & Kupfer, D. J. (1997).
Coming to terms with the terms of risk. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54, 337-343.
Laseque, C. (1964). De l’anorexie hysterique. [On hysterical anorexia]. In R. M. Kaufman & M.
Heiman (Eds.), Evolutions of psychosomatic concepts: Anorexia nervosa a paradigm. New
York: International University Press. (Original work published 1873)
Leon, G. A., Fulkerson, J. A., Perry, C. L., & Early-Zald, M. D. (1995). Prospective analysis of
personality and behavioral vulnerabilities and gender influences in the later development of
disorder eating. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 104, 140-149.
Lewinsohn, P. M., Hops, H., Roberts, R. E., Seeley, J. R., & Andrews, J. A. (1993). Adolescent
psychopathology: I. Prevalence and incidence of depression and other DSM-III-R disorders
in high school students. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 102, 133-144.
Lilenfeld, L. R., & Kaye, W. H. (1998). Genetic studies of anorexia and bulimia nervosa. In H. W.
Hoek, J. L. Treasure, & M. A. Katzman (Eds.), Neurobiology in the treatment of eating disor-
ders (pp. 169-194). New York: Wiley & Sons.
Mitchell, J. (in press). Psychopharmacology of eating disorders: Current knowledge and future
directions. In R. H. Striegel-Moore & L. Smolak (Eds.), Eating disorders: Innovative direc-
tions for research and practice. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Newman, D. L., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Magdol, L., Silva, P. A., & Stanton, W. R. (1996). Psy-
chiatric disorder in a birth cohort of young adults: Prevalence, comorbidity, clinical signifi-
cance, and new case incidence from ages 11 to 21. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psy-
chology, 64, 552-562.
Orbach, S. (1986). Hunger strike: The anorectic’s struggle as a metaphor for our age. New
York: Norton.
Patton, G. C., Johnson-Sabine, E., Wood, K., Mann, A. H., & Wakeling, A. (1990). Abnormal
eating attitudes in London school girls: A prospective epidemiological study. Psychiatric
Medicine, 20, 383-394.
Regier, D. A., Kaelber, C. T., Rae, D. S., Farmer, M. E., Knauper, B., Kessler, R. C., & Norquist,
G. S. (1998). Limitations of diagnostic criteria and assessment instruments for mental disor-
ders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 55, 109-115.
Robins, L. N., Helzer, J. E., Weissman, M. M., Orvaschel, H., Gruenberg, E., Burke, J. D., &
Regier, D. A. (1984). Lifetime prevalence of specific psychiatric disorders in three sites.
Archives of General Psychiatry, 41, 949-958.
Rodin, J., Silberstein, L. R., & Striegel-Moore, R. H. (1985). Women and weight: A normative
discontent. In T. B. Sonderegger (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 267-308).
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Russell, G. (1979). Bulimia nervosa, an ominous variant of anorexia nervosa. Psychological
Medicine, 9, 429-448.
Shisslak, C. M., Pazda, S. L., & Crago, M. (1990). Body weight and bulimia as discriminators of
psychological characteristics among anorexic, bulimic, and obese women. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 99, 380-384.
Smolak, L., & Striegel-Moore, R. H. (in press). Challenging the myth of the golden girl. In R. H.
Striegel-Moore & L. Smolak (Eds.), Eating disorders: Innovative directions for research
and practice. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Stice, E., & Agras, W. S. (1998). Predicting onset and cessation of bulimic behaviors during ado-
lescence: A longitudinal grouping analysis. Behavior Therapy, 29, 257-276.
Stice, E., Agras, W. S., & Hammer, L. D. (1999). Risk factors for the emergence of childhood
eating disturbances: A five-year prospective study. International Journal of Eating Disor-
ders, 25, 375-387.
Stice, E., Cameron, R. P., Killen, J. D., Hayward, C., & Taylor, C. B. (1999). Naturalistic weight-
reduction efforts prospectively predict growth in relative weight and onset of obesity among
female adolescents. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 67, 967-974.
Striegel-Moore, R. H. (1993). Etiology of binge eating: A developmental perspective. In C. G.
Fairburn & G. T. Wilson (Eds.), Binge eating (pp. 144-172). New York: Guilford.
Striegel-Moore, R. H. (2000, May 4). Eating disorders 2000: Beyond cultural stereotypes. Paper
presented at the International Conference on Eating Disorders, New York.
Striegel-Moore, R. H., & Cachelin, F. M. (1999). Body image concerns and disordered eating in
adolescent girls: Risk and protective factors. In N. G. Johnson, M. C. Roberts, & J. Worell
(Eds.), Beyond appearance: A new look at adolescent girls (pp. 85-108). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Striegel-Moore, R. H., Cachelin, F. M., Dohm, F. A., Pike, K. M., Wilfley, D. E., & Fairburn,
C. G. (in press). Comparison of binge eating disorder and bulimia nervosa in a community
sample. International Journal of Eating Disorders.
Striegel-Moore, R. H., & Marcus, M. (1995). Eating disorders in women: Current issues and
debates. In A. L. Stanton & S. G. Gallant (Eds.), Women’s health book (pp. 445-487). Wash-
ington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Striegel-Moore, R. H., Silberstein, L. R., & Rodin, J. (1986). Toward an understanding of risk
factors for bulimia. American Psychologist, 41, 246-263.
Striegel-Moore, R. H., & Smolak, L. (1996). The role of race in the development of eating disor-
ders. In L. Smolak, M. P. Levine, & R. H. Striegel-Moore (Eds.). The developmental
psychopathology of eating disorders (pp. 259-284). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Striegel-Moore, R. H., & Smolak, L. (2000). The influence of ethnicity on eating disorders in
women. In R. M. Eisler & M. Hersen (Eds.), Handbook of gender, culture, and health
(pp. 227-254). Mawhaw, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Strober, M. (1995). Disorders of self in anorexia nervosa: An organismic-developmental para-
digm. In C. L. Johnson (Ed.), Psychodynamic treatment of anorexia nervosa and bulimia
(pp. 354-373). New York: Guilford.
Strober, M., Freeman, R., Lampert, C., Diamond, J., & Kaye, W. (in press). Controlled family
study of anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa: Evidence of shared liability and transmission
of partial syndromes. American Journal of Psychiatry.
Sullivan, P. F., Bulik, C. M., & Kendler, K. S. (1998). Genetic epidemiology of binging and vom-
iting. British Journal of Psychiatry, 173 75-79.
Taylor, C. B., Altman, T., Shisslak, C., Bryson, S., Estes, L. S., Gray, N., McKnight, K. M.,
Kraemer, H. C., & Killen, J. D. (1998). Factors associated with weight concerns in adoles-
cents. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 24, 31-42.
van Hoeken, D., Lucas, A. R., & Hoek, H. W. (1998). Epidemiology. In H. W. Hoek, J. L.
Trasure, & M. A. Katzman (Eds.), Neurobiology in the treatment of eating disorders (pp. 97-
126). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Vitousek, K. B., & Hollon, S. D. (1990). The investigation of schematic content and processing
in eating disorders. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14, 191-214.
Walker, E. A., Unutzer, J., Rutter, C., Gelfand, A., Saunders, K., VonKorff, A. Koss, M. P., &
Katon, W. (1999). Costs of health care use by women HMO members with a history of child-
hood abuse and neglect. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 609-613.
Walters, E. E., & Kendler, K. S. (1995). Anorexia nervosa and anorexic-like syndromes in a pop-
ulation-based female twin sample. American Journal of Psychiatry, 152, 64-71.
Whitaker, A. H. (1992). An epidemiological study of anorectic and bulimic symptoms in adoles-
cent girls. Pediatric Annals, 21, 752-759.
Whittal, M. L., Agras, W. S., & Gould, R. A. (1999). Bulimia nervosa: A meta-analysis of
psychosocial and pharmacological treatments. Behavior Therapy, 30, 117-135.
Wilfley, D. E., Pike, K. M., Dohm, F., Striegel-Moore, R. H., & Fairburn, C. G. (in press). A com-
parison of a community sample and a clinical sample of women with BED. Journal of Con-
sulting and Clinical Psychology.
Wonderlich, S., Mitchell, J., Peterson, C, & Crow, S. (in press). Integrative cognitive therapy for
bulimic behavior. In R. H. Striegel-Moore & L. Smolak (Eds.), Eating disorders: Innovative
directions for research and practice. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Yanovski, S. Z. (1993). Binge eating disorder: Current knowledge and future directions. Obesity
Research, 1, 306-318.
Zahner, G.E.P., Hsieh, C., & Fleming, J. A. (1995). Introduction to epidemiologic research
methods. In M. T. Tsnang, M. Tohen, & G.E.P. Zahner (Eds.), Textbook in psychiatric epide-
miology (pp. 23-53). New York: Wiley & Sons.