Skip to main content

Binge Eating Scale (BES) Research Statistics

Assessment Information
  • Sample Adequacy: Preliminary dataset. Interpret norms cautiously.
  • Research Status: PRELIMINARY NORMATIVE DATASET
  • Items: 16
  • Dimensions: 9
  • Dataset Maturity: The current dataset achieved a maturity score of 0/100 and is classified as EARLY DATASET.

Table 1
Normative Dataset Overview
Descriptive characteristics of the current normative sample.
Participants 2
Countries Represented 1
Dataset Maturity 0/100 — Early DatasetDataset
Research Status PRELIMINARY NORMATIVE DATASET
Sample Adequacy Preliminary dataset. Interpret norms cautiously.
Data Collection Period May 24, 2026 – May 28, 2026
The current normative dataset consists of 2 participants collected from 1 countries.
Table 2
Score Statistics
Measures of central tendency and variability.
Mean Score 58%
Median Score 58
Standard Deviation 2.83
Variance 8
Standard Error (SEM) 2
Reliability (α) 0
Items 16
Dimensions 9
The sample demonstrated a mean score of 58% (Mdn = 58, SD = 2.83).
Table 3
Distribution Characteristics
Distribution shape and score dispersion indicators.
Observed Score Range 4
Maximum Observed Score 60%
Minimum Observed Score 56%
95% Confidence Interval 54.08– 61.92
Skewness 0
Kurtosis 0
Observed skewness (0) and kurtosis (0) provide indicators of distribution quality and normality.
Global Participation Chart Participants IN 2 #1
Global Participation Interpretation

The current dataset includes responses from 1countries . The largest contribution currently comes from IN which represents approximately 100% of all participants. International participation enhances sample diversity and improves the generalizability of normative findings across geographic regions.

Normative Percentile Distribution

Population Median 10th Percentile 56 Population Median 25th Percentile 56 Population Median 50th Percentile 56 Population Median 75th Percentile 56 Population Median 90th Percentile 56
Normative Interpretation

The current normative dataset indicates that approximately 10% of participants scored below 56%, while 90% scored above this level. The median score was 56%, meaning that half of participants scored below this value and half scored above it. Scores of 56% or greater were achieved by approximately the highest 25% of participants, whereas scores of 56% or greater were achieved by approximately the highest 10% of participants. These percentile values provide preliminary normative benchmarks that can be used to contextualize individual assessment results relative to the current community sample.

Distribution Histogram

50-59 1 60-69 1
Distribution Interpretation

This histogram displays the distribution of participant scores across the assessment. A balanced bell-shaped pattern generally indicates good score dispersion and stronger normative utility, whereas highly skewed distributions may indicate floor effects, ceiling effects, or sample bias.

Distribution Quality

The score distribution demonstrated a skewness of 0 and a kurtosis of 0.

The score distribution appears reasonably balanced and does not currently suggest substantial departures from normality.

Reliability Analysis

0 Poor Acceptable Good Excellent

UNACCEPTABLE RELIABILITY

The current dataset produced an internal consistency estimate (Cronbach's α = 0) that falls below commonly accepted psychometric standards. Interpretations should therefore be considered preliminary until additional participant responses are collected and item functioning is further evaluated.

Item–Total Correlations

Insufficient Sample Size

Item–total correlations are not currently reported because the assessment has fewer than 100 participant responses. Psychometric item analysis requires a larger sample to produce stable and interpretable estimates.

Current Participants: 2
Minimum Recommended: 100

Dimension Norms

Dimension Profile Mean SD 50% Food Preoccupation 83% 0 Loss of Control Eating 78% 0 Binge Eating Behaviors 72.5% 7.8 Body Image Distress 50% 24 Physical Hunger Awareness 50% 0 Dieting Instability 41.5% 12 Social Eating Avoidance 33.5% 47.4 Emotional Eating 33% 0 Shame and Guilt 16.5% 23.3
Dimension Interpretation

The highest scoring dimension in the current sample was Food Preoccupation (83%). The lowest scoring dimension was Shame and Guilt (16.5%). Dimensions located above the 50% reference line represent characteristics that were more strongly endorsed within the current participant sample. Standard deviations indicate the degree of variability observed across participant responses.

Research Interpretation

This psychometric dataset currently includes 2 anonymous participant responses collected through voluntary participation. The observed mean score was 58 with a standard deviation of 2.83, indicating moderate score variability within the sampled population. Internal consistency reliability analysis produced a Cronbach alpha of 0, which falls below commonly accepted psychometric standards and should be interpreted cautiously until additional data are collected. Observed skewness (0) and kurtosis (0) were examined as indicators of distribution quality. The score distribution appeared reasonably balanced and did not suggest substantial departures from normality.

Ethical & Research Notice

All responses included in this dataset are collected anonymously through voluntary participation. No personally identifying information is stored. Results are intended exclusively for educational, psychometric, research, and self-reflective purposes and should not be used as clinical diagnoses. Trait Profiler continuously monitors response quality, distribution stability, and internal consistency to support ethical psychometric reporting.

Dataset Export

Download CSV Dataset

Research Citation

Binge Eating Scale (BES). Trait Profiler Interactive Research Dataset. Retrieved from https://traitprofiler.com/binge-eating-scale/statistics/

License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)