DClinPsy Portfolio Volume 1 of 3 - University of Hertfordshire ...

25 (28%) out of the 88 participants that answered the question on bullying reported
having experienced bullying and 63 (72%) reported that they had not. Of those that had
experienced bullying 50 (79%) were in the low EDR group with only 13 (15%) in the
moderate and high EDR groups. These differences in percentages, however, were not
significant, Chi-square = 2.48, (df = 2), p =.307, Contingency Coefficient .166.
Table 28 - Counts and percentages for EDR groups in relation to the reported experience
of bullying
Experience
of bullying
Total
no
yes
Eating Disorder risk categories
Total
low moderate high
Count 50 6 7 63
% within Eating
Disorder risk categories 75.8% 54.5% 63.6% 71.6%
Count 16 5 4 25
% within Eating
Disorder risk categories 24.2% 45.5% 36.4% 28.4%
Count 66 11 11 88
% within Eating
Disorder risk categories 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
7) Differences in perfectionism between the EDR risk groups
As was explained in the method section, perfectionism was one of the subscales from the
EDI-3 measure, which was not one of the subscales included in the EDR composite
score. Due to its importance as a risk factor in the eating disorders it is considered here in
relation to EDR. Boxplots and descriptive statistics can be found in Appendix 14. A
Kruskal-Wallis found that there were no significant differences between the three EDR
groups on perfectionism, Chi-square = 1.39, (df=2), p=0.50.
8) Differences in low self esteem between the EDR groups
Self-esteem is a subscale within the EDI-3 questionnaire, but again was not one of the
subscales included in the forming of the EDR groups.
195