Poster presented at ICED 2017 in Prague, Czech Republic.

1. Methods (cont’d) Results (cont’d)Introduction
• “Drunkorexia” – a range of behaviors individuals
engage in for two purposes
1. Increase intoxicating effects
2. Negate caloric gain1
• These disordered eating behaviors (e.g., skipping
meals or purging) used to compensate for calories
consumed via alcoholic beverages – represents a
growing concern among young adults.2
• The current study examined gender differences in
prevalence and associations with eating
disturbances.
Hypotheses:
• Women will report more compensatory behaviors
in response to alcohol use.
• CEBRACS scores will be positively correlated
with disordered eating behaviors and cognitions.
Participants:
• 606 participants (78% women) – all indicated they
have engaged in alcohol use in the past 3 months
• Demographics: 56% White, 21% Hispanic, 10%
Black or African American, 5% Asian, 7%
Multiple, 1% Other
• 18 to 51 years-of-age (M = 20.98, SD = 3.65)
Measures:
• Drive for Thinness subscale from the Eating
Disorder Inventory (EDI-DT) 3
• Eating Disorder Diagnostic Scale (EDDS)
symptom count4
• Compensatory Eating and Behaviors in Response
to Alcohol Consumption Scale (CEBRACS) 5
Mean Group Differences Conclusions:
• First large scale prevalence study, suggests
approximately 55% of individuals are engaging in
Drunkorexia behaviors.
• May have clinical implications as it is highly
correlated with disordered eating behaviors
Limitations and Future Research:
• Predominantly female sample
• Range restriction on CEBRACS
• Determine clinically significant cutoffs
• Examine a potential theoretical model.
Drunkorexia prevalence in a college sample and associations with eating
disturbances
Emily Choquette and Kevin Thompson
University of South Florida
Presented at the 2017 International Conference on Eating Disorders in Prague, Czech Republic, June 8th-10th Questions or for a copy of the scale contact Emily Choquette at echoquette@mail.usf.edu
References
1. Chambers, R. A. (2008). Drunkorexia. Journal of Dual Diagnosis, 4(4), 414-416. doi: 10.1080/15504260802086677
2. Barry, A. E. & Piazza-Gardner, P. (2012). Drunkorexia: Understanding the co-occurrence of alcohol consumption and eating/exercise
weight management behaviors. Journal of American College Health, 60(3), 236-243.
3. Garner, D. M. (2004). Eating Disorder Inventory-3: Professional manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
4. Stice, E. (n.d.) Measures created by or modified by Eric Stice. Retrieved from http://www.ori.org/sticemeasures/.
5. Rahal, C. J., Bryant, J. B., Darkes, J., Menzel, J. E., & Thompson, J. K. (2012). Development and validation of the Compensatory Eating and
Behaviors in Response to Alcohol Consumption Scale (CEBRACS). Eating Behaviors, 13(2), 83-87
Method
Note: Pairs of superscript indicate significant group differences a p < 0.05
Discussion
Women Men Total
Drive for thinness 15.57a 9.66a 14.25
CEBRACS Total 5.90 5.22 5.74
CEBRACS Bulimia 0.49 0.42 0.47
CEBRACS Restriction 0.41b 0.22b 0.36
CEBRACS Diet & Exercise 2.90 2.45 2.79
CEBRACS Alcohol Effects 2.11 2.13 2.11
EDDS Symptom Count 19.40c 14.87c 15.52
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1.Drive for thinness - 0.67** 0.28** 0.22** 0.29** .25** 0.1
2. EDDS Symptom count 0.68** - 0.40** 0.29** 0.36** .39** .33**
3. CEBRACS Total 0.39** 0.46** - 0.86** 0.85** .80** 0.66**
4. CEBRACS Alcohol
Effects 0.27** 0.31** 0.82** - 0.50** .66** .40**
5. CEBRACS Diet &
Exercise 0.42** 0.42** 0.85** 0.48** - 0.68** .50**
6. CEBRACS Restriction 0.30** 0.45** 0.84** 0.63** 0.65** - .50**
7. CEBRACS Bulimia 0.18** 0.36** 0.69** 0.38** 0.48** 0.69** -
Correlations by Gender
Note: Female correlations are below the diagonal and males are above the diagonal
** indicates correlation significant at p<.01
Results
The CEBRACS consists of 4 subscales measuring
behaviors before, during, and after alcohol
consumption for the previous 3 months:
1. Alcohol Effects: using compensatory behaviors
to get drunker faster – 7 questions
2. Diet & Exercise: eating/ drinking lower calorie
options and engaging in exercise to compensate
for calories – 6 questions
3. Restriction: skipping meals to compensate for
calories – 2 questions
4. Bulimia: use of laxatives, diuretics or purging in
to compensate for calories – 6 questions
Items are score from 0 (never) to 4 (almost all the
time). Resulting in a full scale score ranging from 0
to 84.
• Scores ranged from 0 – 54
• 55.5% of participants indicated at least 1
Drunkorexia behavior
• Women did not report more compensatory
behaviors than men on any of the subscales except
for restriction, although this effect size was small1
Footnotes
1. Cohen’s d = .203
• CEBRACS total and subscales were positively
correlated with eating disorder symptoms both
men and women
• CEBRACS scores were not associated with drive
for thinness for men