tjph

Turkish Journal of Public Health

1304-1088

Halk Sağlığı Uzmanları Derneği

10.20518/tjph.1773807

Health Literacy Public Health (Other)

Sağlık Okuryazarlığı Halk Sağlığı (Diğer)

Adaptation and psychometric evaluation of the eating and food literacy behaviours questionnaire (EFLBQ) for Turkish university students

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7981-1302

Çelik

Menşure Nur

ONDOKUZ MAYIS ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ FAKÜLTESİ

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5365-1796

Bölükbaşı

Hatice

SÜLEYMAN DEMİREL ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ FAKÜLTESİ

04 07 2026

1 08 29 2025 01 11 2026

2003

Turkish Journal of Public Health

Objective: Adolescence and young adulthood are critical periods for forming independent eating habits, shaping identities, and establishing lifelong health practices. Addressing food literacy during this developmental stage is essential. It was aimed to evaluate the Turkish validity and reliability of the eating and food literacy behaviors survey (EFLBQ) among university students.Method: A cross-sectional study involved 190 university students aged 18-30 from various universities across Turkey, conducted between January and July 2024. The EFLBQ was translated into Turkish by nutrition experts. Content validity was confirmed using the Davis technique, followed by a pilot test to ensure clarity and suitability for the target population. Outcomes included construct validity (assessed via exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses), internal consistency (measured with Cronbach’s alpha and omega coefficients), and test-retest reliability. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses evaluated the structure of the questionnaire. Internal consistency was determined using Cronbach’s alpha and omega coefficients. Test-retest reliability assessed the stability of responses over time.Results: The Turkish version of the EFLBQ contained 18 items organized into four sub-dimensions, explaining 59.0% of the total variance. A CMIN/df value of 1.636 indicated a good model fit. Internal consistency was strong, with Cronbach’s alpha and omega coefficients calculated at 0.87. Test-retest reliability was acceptable (0.692, p<0.001). Significant correlations between item-total scores further supported reliability.Conclusion: The Turkish EFLBQ is a valid and reliable instrument for evaluating food literacy among university students, providing a robust tool for future research and intervention development.

Validity Reliability Food Literacy Eating Behavior University Students

1. Jayedi A, Soltani S, Abdolshahi A, Shab-Bidar S. Healthy and unhealthy dietary patterns and the risk of chronic disease: an umbrella review of meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies. Br J Nutr 2020;124(11):1133–44.

2. Monteiro CA, Moubarac JC, Cannon G, Ng SW, Popkin B. Ultra-processed products are becoming dominant in the global food system. Obes Rev 2013;14(Suppl 2):21–8.

3. Malan H, Watson TD, Slusser W, Glik D, Rowat AC, Prelip M. Challenges, opportunities, and motivators for developing and applying food literacy in a university setting: A qualitative study. J Acad Nutr Diet 2020;120(1):33–44.

4. Mengi Çelik Ö, Güler Ü, Ekici EM, Aytekin Şahin G. Factors associated with ultra-processed foods consumption: cooking and food preparation skills and food literacy. BMC Public Health 2025;25(1):3078.

5. Şahan EŞ, Aytulu T. Genç Erişkinlerde Sürdürülebilir Gıda Okuryazarlığı, Ultra İşlenmiş Gıda Tüketimi ve Beden Kütle İndeksi İlişkisi. Gumushane Univ Saglik Bilim Derg 2025;14(3):920–31.

6. Velardo S. The nuances of health literacy, nutrition literacy, and food literacy. J Nutr Educ Behav 2015;47(4):385–9.

7. Larson NI, Perry CL, Story M, Neumark-Sztainer D. Food preparation by young adults is associated with better diet quality. J Am Diet Assoc 2006;106(12):2001–7.

8. Thorpe MG, Kestin M, Riddell LJ, Keast RS, McNaughton SA. Diet quality in young adults and its association with food-related behaviours. Public Health Nutr 2014;17(8):1767-75.

9. Kelly NR, Mazzeo SE, Bean MK. Systematic review of dietary interventions with college students: directions for future research and practice. J Nutr Educ Behav 2013;45(4):304–13.

10. Rhea KC, Cater MW, McCarter K, Tuuri G. Psychometric Analyses of the Eating and Food Literacy Behaviors Questionnaire with University Students. J Nutr Educ Behav 2020;52(10):1008–17.

11. Vaitkeviciute R, Ball LE, Harris N. The relationship between food literacy and dietary intake in adolescents: a systematic review. Public Health Nutr 2015;18(4):649–58.

12. Murphrey TR, Cater MW, Carr IJ, Tuuri G. The Eating and Food Literacy Behaviors Questionnaire has the capacity to distinguish between food literacy scores of students enrolled in senior-level nutrition classes compared with those students registered in other academic courses. J Acad Nutr Diet 2024;124(6):740–6.

13. Boaventura RM, Mendonça RB, Fonseca FA, Mallozi M, Souza FS, Sarni ROS. Nutritional status and food intake of children with cow's milk allergy. Allergol Immunopathol (Madr) 2019;47(6):544–50.

14. Poelman MP, Dijkstra SC, Sponselee H, et al. Towards the measurement of food literacy with respect to healthy eating: the development and validation of the self perceived food literacy scale among an adult sample in the Netherlands. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2018;15(1):54.

15. Selçuk KT, Çevik C, Baydur H, Meseri R. Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the self-perceived food literacy scale. Prog Nutr 2020;22(2):671–7.

16. Davis LL. Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Appl Nurs Res 1992;5(4):194–7.

17. Büyüköztürk Ş. Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı: İstatistik, Araştırma Deseni, SPSS Uygulamaları ve Yorum. 4. Baskı. Ankara: Pegem Yayınları, 2004.

18. Field A. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. 6th ed. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2024.

19. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric Theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994.

20. Şengüzel S, Akyüz EY. Çocuk Besin Reddi Ölçeği’nin Türkçe Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. Besl Diyet Derg 2022;50(1):27–34.

21. Mozaffarian D. Dietary and policy priorities for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and obesity: a comprehensive review. Circulation 2016;133(2):187–225.

22. Groufh-Jacobsen S, Larsson C, Van Daele W, et al. Food literacy and diet quality in young vegans, lacto-ovo vegetarians, pescatarians, flexitarians and omnivores. Public Health Nutr 2023;26(12):3051–61.

23. Lee Y, Kim T, Jung H. The relationships between food literacy, health promotion literacy and healthy eating habits among young adults in South Korea. Foods 2022;11(16):2467.

24. Vidgen HA, Gallegos D. Defining food literacy and its components. Appetite 2014;76:50–9.

25. Kabasakal-Cetin A, Aksaray B, Sen G. The role of food literacy and sustainable and healthy eating behaviors in ultra-processed foods consumption of undergraduate students. Food Qual Prefer 2024;119:105232.

26. Mortaş H, Navruz-Varlı S, Çıtar-Dazıroğlu ME, Bilici S. Can unveiling the relationship between nutritional literacy and sustainable eating behaviors survive our future?Sustainability 2023;15(18):13925.

27. Svendsen K, Westergren A, Fjellström C, Sjöden PO, Rosendahl KI. Gender differences in nutrition literacy levels among university students and employees: a descriptive study. J Nutr Sci 2021;10:e56.

28. Wardle J, Haase AM, Steptoe A, Nillapun M, Jonwutiwes K, Bellisle F. Gender differences in food choice: the contribution of health beliefs and dieting. Ann Behav Med 2004;27(2):107–16.

29. Sponselee HC, Dijkstra SC, Sluijs I, Poelman MP, Seidell JC. Food and health promotion literacy among employees with a low and medium level of education in the Netherlands. BMC Public Health 2021;21(1):1542.

30. Simon D, Loh A, Wills CE, Härter M. Confirmatory factor analysis and recommendations for improvement of the Autonomy-Preference-Index (API). Health Expect 2010;13(3):234–43.