BRIEF REPORT

Family Functioning in Adolescents with Binge-Eating Disorder

Anne Tetzlaff, Ricarda Schmidt, Anne Brauhardt & Anja Hilbert*
Integrated Research and Treatment Center Adiposity Diseases, Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, Leipzig University Medical Center,
Germany

Abstract
Objective: While the importance of family factors on the development and maintenance of adolescent anorexia and bulimia nervosa has
been well documented, virtually nothing is known about these impacts in binge-eating disorder (BED). Therefore, this study sought to
examine family functioning (FF) in families of adolescents with BED.
Method: A total of 40 adolescents meeting diagnostic criteria for full-syndrome or sub-threshold BED were compared to 40 matched
adolescents without any eating disorder symptoms (CG). Adolescents’, mothers’, and fathers’ perspectives of various FF components
were assessed using self-report questionnaires.
Results: Adolescents with BED reported significantly less emotionality and affective involvement, and lower adaptability compared to the
CG, although all FF subscales fell within the normal range (T score < 60).
Conclusions: This study provided evidence for decreased FF in families with an adolescent with BED. Further research is needed to
clarify associations between FF and the onset and course of BED. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and Eating Disorders
Association.
Received 26 February 2016; Revised 31 May 2016; Accepted 6 June 2016
*Correspondence
Anja Hilbert, PhD, Integrated Research and Treatment Center Adiposity Diseases, Leipzig University Medical Center, Philipp-Rosenthal-Strasse 27, 04103 Leipzig,
Germany. Tel: +49 341 97 15360; Fax: +49 341 97 15359.
Email: anja.hilbert@medizin.uni-leipzig.de

Published online 18 July 2016 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/erv.2462

Introduction and aims
Various family factors have been identified as risk factors for
adolescent anorexia (AN) and bulimia nervosa (BN; Lyke &
Matsen, 2013; McGrane & Carr, 2002). Particularly, family func-
tioning (FF), defined as ‘the interactions with family members
that involve physical, emotional, and psychological activities’
(Commonwealth of Kentucky, 2014), has been found to be
impaired in families of adolescents with AN and BN compared
with control families (Holtom-Viesel & Allan, 2014). Relatedly,
lower FF was associated with unhealthy weight-related behav-
iours, disordered eating behaviours (Berge et al., 2014), and
higher eating disorder psychopathology (Wisotsky et al., 2003)
in non-clinical adolescent samples. When comparing different
family perspectives, patients with AN and BN described their
families as more dysfunctional than one or both parents
(Dancyger, Fornari, Scionti, Wisotsky, & Sunday, 2005;
Woodside et al., 1995). However, FF has not been examined
in adolescents with binge-eating disorder (BED; Tetzlaff &
Hilbert, 2014), recently established as its own diagnostic category
(APA, 2013).
Binge-eating disorder is characterized by recurrent binge-
eating episodes in the absence of regular inappropriate compensa-
tory behaviour (APA, 2013) and has been identified in 1.6% of
adolescents in the community (Swanson, Crow, Le Grange,
Swendsen, & Merikangas, 2011). In children and adolescent
community samples, binge eating was found to be associated with
insecure attachment (Goossens, Braet, Van Durme, Decaluwe, &
Bosmans, 2012) and less caring, more parental overprotection
(Wertheim et al., 1992), and lower family connectedness (Tomori
& Rus-Makovec, 2000). As a pathological and more specific
family factor, higher levels of expressed emotion were recently
found in youth with BED who perceived their mothers as more
critical, more emotionally over-involved, and less warm com-
pared with controls (Schmidt, Tetzlaff, & Hilbert, 2015). While
expressed emotion is very important for FF and has already been
examined in families of patients with AN and BN (Duclos,
Vibert, Mattar, & Godart, 2012), it only represents a part of
FF. In adults, only one study examined various components of
FF, indicating that families with BED were characterized by less
cohesion and expressiveness compared with AN and BN and re-
ported more conflict and control than healthy controls (Hodges,
Cochrane, & Brewerton, 1998). An observational study in chil-
dren with loss of control (LOC) eating (Czaja, Hartmann, Rief,
& Hilbert, 2011), a precursor of BED, demonstrated maladaptive
communication during family mealtimes when compared with
controls.
This comprehensive investigation of FF in adolescent BED
sought to identify differences in FF between families with versus
without BED based on adolescents’, mothers’, and fathers’
reports. According to the literature, we hypothesized that
adolescents with BED would report lower FF (more impaired
communication, less emotionality, less affective expression, more
control, less cohesion, and less adaptability) than controls.
Further, we hypothesized adolescents with BED to describe their
families’ functioning as more dysfunctional than their own

430 Eur. Eat. Disorders Rev. 24 (2016) 430–433 © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and Eating Disorders Association.
A. Tetzlaff et al. Family Functioning in BED

parents, while there would be no differences between family indicating greater disengagement and rigidity respectively
members from the control group (CG). (.71 ≤ α ≤ .79 across family members in this sample).
Data analytic plan
Method
For testing the first hypothesis, a multivariate analysis of vari-
Participants and procedures ance was conducted to examine group differences (BED, CG)
Overall, N = 80 adolescents (12–20 years) were recruited from a in the adolescents’ FS and FACES reports. For the second hy-
randomized-controlled trial offering cognitive-behavioural ther- pothesis, to parse between-participant versus within-participant
apy to adolescents with BED at baseline (Hilbert, 2013) (BED variability while accounting for the nested data design, linear
group; n = 40) and via schools and Internet-based advertisements
(CG; n = 40). The groups were matched by frequency according to
age, sex, body mass index standard deviation score, determined
based on measured weight and height, and socio-economic status. Table 1 Individual and family characteristics
Inclusion criteria for the BED group were a diagnosis of full-
syndrome or sub-threshold BED based on objective and/or sub- BED (n = 40) CG (n = 40)
Test statistics
jective episodes of binge eating according to the Diagnostic and M/n SD/% M/n SD/%
Statistical Manual 4th edition (APA, 2000) and the Diagnostic
and Statistical Manual 5th edition (APA, 2013; refer to Hilbert, Adolescents
Age, years* 14.95 2.49 15.15 2.56 F(1, 79) = 0.13
2013 for more detail). Inclusion in the CG was based on the
BMI-SDS 1.91 0.88 1.77 1.02 F(1, 79) = 0.39
absence of current and lifetime eating disorder symptoms. The Weight status**
exclusion criteria for both groups included current BN, substance Normal weight 11 27.5 16 40.0
2
χ (2) = 2.28
abuse, suicidal ideation, psychotic or bipolar disorder, serious Overweight 8 20.0 4 10.0
unstable medical problems, intake of antipsychotic or weight- Obese 21 52.5 20 50.0
2
affecting drugs, psychotherapy, conservative weight loss treat- Sex, female 35 87.5 34 85.0 χ (1) = 0.11
ment, or participation in another treatment trial. Severity of BED***
At the outset of an on-site diagnostic session, written assent was Full-syndrome 30 75.0
obtained from all the adolescents, and for those <18 years, at least Sub-threshold 10 25.0
one parent provided informed consent. The adolescents’ eating Number of binge-eating 11.30 8.38
episodes, monthly
disorder status was obtained using the diagnostic items of the
Duration of BED, months 22.88 25.65
Eating Disorder Examination (Hilbert, Tuschen-Caffier, & Ohms, Mothers
2004). Anthropometric characteristics were objectively measured. Age, years 44.49 6.18 45.40 6.01 F(1, 79) = 0.43
All self-report questionnaires were handed out to participating BMI, kg/m
2
26.88 7.56 28.71 7.56 F(1, 79) = 1.14
family members. While all mothers participated, the biological Fathers †

father was sometimes unknown or had infrequent contact. There- Age, years 46.95 6.24 47.78 5.83 F(1, 79) = 0.21
2
fore, stepfathers were asked to participate, if possible. The families BMI, kg/m 27.26 3.69 26.77 4.24 F(1, 79) = 0.17
of the patients with BED were offered treatment free of charge, Families
whereas the families of the control participants were offered Family status
2
€15 as incentive. The study was approved by the Ethics Commit- Married 15 37.5 17 42.5 χ (5) = 5.17
Unmarried 3 7.5 3 7.5
tee of the Medical Faculty of the University of Leipzig, Germany.
Separated/Divorced 20 50.0 15 37.5
Widowed 0 0.0 4 10.0
Measures Father’s living situation†
2
Father in household 23 57.5 25 75.8 χ (1) = 2.68
The Family Scales (FS; German version: Familienbögen; Cierpka
Father not in household 17 42.5 8 24.2
& Frevert, 1994), a translated and advanced version of the Family
SES
Assessment Measure (Skinner, Steinhauer, & Santa-Barbara, Low SES 7 17.5 10 25.0
2
χ (3) = 0.86
1983), were administered to assess four components of FF: Middle SES 16 40.0 14 35.0
communication, emotionality, affective involvement, and High SES 14 35.0 14 35.0
conflict. The FS have acceptable to good psychometric properties
(.70 ≤ α ≤ .83 across family members in this sample), and norms Note: BMI-SDS, standard deviation score of the body mass index; BMI, body mass
2
are available (Cierpka & Frevert, 1994). The items were rated index (kg/m ); SES, socio-economic status (Winkler social class index); BED,
from 0 = strongly disagree to 3 = strongly agree. For the subscales, binge-eating disorder; CG, control group. Because of missing data, percentages
may not add up to 100%.
sum scores were computed and transformed into T scores, with
*Age range 12 to 20 years in both groups.
T scores ≥60 indicating low FF and T scores <60 indicating FF
**Normal weight = 1.28 < BMI-SDS < 1.28; overweight = BMI-SDS ≤ 1.28; obese
as being within the normal range. = BMI-SDS ≤ 1.88.
The Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales III ***Full-syndrome, BED according to DSM-IV-TR or DSM-5 (objective and/or
(FACES; Olson, 1985) were used to assess adaptability and cohe- subjective episodes); sub-threshold, BED (of low frequency and/or limited
sion. Sum scores for both subscales were computed (items rated duration) according to DSM-5.
†
from 0 = almost never to 5 = almost always), with lower scores BED group n = 22, CG n = 28.

Eur. Eat. Disorders Rev. 24 (2016) 430–433 © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and Eating Disorders Association. 431
Family Functioning in BED A. Tetzlaff et al.

mixed models (LMMs) of Group (BED, CG) × Member (adoles- Discussion

cent, mother, father) and their interaction were used for each
subscale. Members were hierarchically nested within families.
Because of the correlated nature of repeated measure data and
different variances between members, an unstructured covari-
ance structure was assumed. For additional analyses, Pearson
correlation coefficients were used to determine the associations
between the adolescents’ age, sex, BED subtype (full syndrome
or sub-threshold), number of binge-eating episodes, duration
of BED, and each FF subscale.
Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 20.0. Signifi-
cance was set at a two-tailed α <.05.
Results
By design, the BED group and the CG did not differ in
sociodemographic and anthropometric variables (all p > .05; refer
to Table 1).
The adolescents with BED differed significantly on the FF sub-
scales from the CG (F(6, 73) = 2.39, p = .04, η2 = 0.16). In univar-
iate analyses, the adolescents with BED reported significantly
higher FS emotionality (F(1, 79) = 4.97, p = .03, η2 = 0.06), FS
affective involvement (F(1, 79) = 4.16, p = .04, η2 = 0.05), and
lower FACES adaptability than the CG (F(1,79) = 6.13, p = .02,
η2 = 0.07; refer to Table 2). Differences on FACES cohesion were
on trend level (F(1, 79) = 3.21, p = .08, η2 = 0.04).
The LMM on FS emotionality revealed a significant main effect
of group (p = .03; refer to Table 2). An interaction effect of
Group × Member for FACES adaptability indicated significantly
lower adaptability in the adolescents with BED compared with
the CG (p = .006). The LMMs on FS communication, affective
involvement, and control revealed a significant effect of member
(p < .05). Follow-up analyses indicated that the adolescents’
reports on these subscales were more positive than the parents’
reports (p < .05).
Additional analyses showed that FF was not significantly
associated with the adolescents’ age, sex, BED subtype, number
of binge-eating episodes, and duration of BED, although
small-to-medium effect sizes were found (r = .14–.34; all
p > .05).
For the first time, this study examined FF in youth with BED.
Consistent with previous findings in adult BED and adolescent
AN and BN (Hodges et al., 1998; Casper & Troiani, 2001;
McDermott, Batik, Roberts, & Gibbon, 2002), youth with BED
displayed a specific pattern of decreased FF when considering
adolescents’ perspectives only. As hypothesized, they reported
significantly less emotionality and affective involvement and lower
adaptability than the controls without any eating disorder symp-
toms. Against expectation and in contrast to findings in AN and
BN (Dancyger et al., 2005; Woodside et al., 1995), the FF ratings
in the families with BED fell within the normal range of FF, sug-
gesting that the families with BED are more likely to report
healthy FF compared with those with other eating disorders.
Notably, although the families reported a healthy level of FF on
average, some families with BED are suggested to exhibit dysfunc-
tional levels of FF.
Importantly, all family members of the adolescents with BED
reported less emotionality than the CG families. Thus, reduced
affective expression (e.g. regarding content, intensity, or timing)
seems to be a noteworthy family factor in BED (Hodges et al.,
1998), as found in AN and BN (Shisslak, McKeon, & Crago,
1990), and in associations between BED and expressed emotion
(Schmidt et al., 2015). Closely linked to affective expression and
in line with findings in AN and BN (Waller, Calam, & Slade,
1989), the adolescents with BED reported less affective involve-
ment than the controls, suggesting difficulties in the family to
meet family members’ emotional and security needs and a lack
of flexibility for family members’ autonomy. Similarly, the adoles-
cents with BED reported lower adaptability than the CG, indicat-
ing difficulties of the family system to change its structure in
response to situational and developmental stress (Olson, 1985).
While the tendency of lower cohesion in adolescents with versus
without BED is consistent with previous findings in adult BED
(Hodges et al., 1998), the results did not reveal impaired commu-
nication and more control in BED versus CG families, contrary to
expectations. Healthy levels of communication and control might
be valuable resources for a family to overcome with more dys-
functional FF components. The fact that both adolescents with

Table 2 Descriptive statistics and linear mixed modelling (LMM) of family functioning in families of adolescents with (BED) versus without (CG) binge-eating disorder

Adolescents Mothers Fathers LMM

BED (n = 40) CG (n = 40) BED (n = 40) CG (n = 40) BED (n = 22) CG (n = 28) Group Member Group × Member

FS subscales
Communication 49 ± 13 46 ± 11 54 ± 12 51 ± 13 55 ± 13 50 ± 12 F(1, 81) = 3.21* F(1, 137) = 7.59*** F(1, 137) = 0.48
Emotionality 53 ± 12 48 ± 10 56 ± 13 52 ± 14 53 ± 13 51 ± 11 F(1, 79) = 4.89** F(1, 134) = 2.52* F(1, 134) = 0.09
Affective involvement 49 ± 12 44 ± 10 52 ± 11 52 ± 12 53 ± 11 52 ± 12 F(1, 84) = 1.39 F(1, 139) = 10.35† F(1, 139) = 1.28
Control 46 ± 9 45 ± 10 50 ± 10 49 ± 11 49 ± 11 52 ± 13 F(1, 86) = 0.02 F(1, 144) = 4.87*** F(1, 144) = 0.64
FACES subscales
Cohesion 30.10 ± 5.79 32.23 ± 4.76 30.82 ± 3.78 31.67 ± 4.80 29.75 ± 4.59 30.04 ± 4.88 F(1, 79) = 1.95 F(1, 133) = 1.90 F(1, 133) = 0.78
Adaptability 25.90 ± 4.98 28.80 ± 5.49 26.97 ± 4.30 26.51 ± 4.35 26.65 ± 4.17 26.29 ± 4.39 F(1, 80) = 0.98 F(1, 137) = 0.85 F(1, 137) = 3.52**

Note: BED, binge-eating disorder; CG, control group; FS, Family Scales: T scores ≥60 indicate low FF, and T scores <60 indicate FF as being within the normal range; FACES,
lower sum scores indicate greater disengagement (cohesion) and rigidity (adaptability); LMM, linear mixed model.
*p < .10.**p < .05.***p < .01.†p < .001.

432 Eur. Eat. Disorders Rev. 24 (2016) 430–433 © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and Eating Disorders Association.
A. Tetzlaff et al. Family Functioning in BED

and without BED reported their families as more functional than
their parents could be influenced by parental problems with the
adolescents’ increased emotional distance, conflict, and behav-
ioural autonomy in puberty (Steinberg, 1987).
With respect to limitations of this preliminary investigation of
FF in adolescent BED, the cross-sectional design did not allow
for causal conclusions. The generalizability of findings is limited
by the use of self-report measures of FF only, comparison of
treatment-seeking and non-treatment seeking groups, and the
oversampling of female adolescents. Finally, because the fathers’
availability was limited in the BED sample, the results on the
family members’ views of FF should be interpreted with caution.
Further research is needed to clarify associations between FF
and binge-eating behaviours using longitudinal designs as well
as experimental and interview-based methods for assessing FF.
As self-reports might provide subjective and socially required per-
spectives, clinicians should be attentive to observable family inter-
actions that may indicate dysfunctional FF. Because the present
study assessed general interactions and attitudes in families,
disorder-specific FF, such as interactions during meals (cf. Czaja
et al., 2011), could be more dysfunctional, and therefore should
be further considered. As the gold standard of treatment of ado-
lescent BED is not yet clear, research would also help to evaluate
the need for family-based intervention in adolescent BED.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Federal Ministry of Education
and Research (BMBF), Germany, FKZ: 01EO1001. No author of
this manuscript has any conflicts of interest.

REFERENCES
APA (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders:
DSM 5. Arlington: American Psychiatric Association.
APA (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
fourth edition, text revision, DSM-IV-TR. Arlington, VA:
American Psychiatric Publishing.
Berge, J. M., Wall, M., Larson, N., Eisenberg, M. E., Loth, K. A., &
Neumark-Sztainer, D. (2014). The unique and additive associa-
tions of family functioning and parenting practices with disor-
dered eating behaviors in diverse adolescents. Journal of
Behavioral Medicine, 37(2), 205–217.
Casper, R. C., & Troiani, M. (2001). Family functioning in anorexia
nervosa differs by subtype. International Journal of Eating
Disorders, 30(3), 338–342.
Cierpka, M., & Frevert, G. (1994). Die Familienbögen (FB): Ein
Inventar zur Einschätzung von Familienfunktionen. Göttingen:
Hogrefe Verlag für Psychologie.
Commonwealth of Kentucky (2014). Family functioning. Retrieved
August 4, 2014 from, http://www.jjab.ky.gov/terms.html.
Czaja, J., Hartmann, A. S., Rief, W., & Hilbert, A. (2011). Mealtime
family interactions in home environments of children with loss
of control eating. Appetite, 56(3), 587–593.
Dancyger, I., Fornari, V., Scionti, L., Wisotsky, W., & Sunday, S.
(2005). Do daughters with eating disorders agree with their par-
ents’ perception of family functioning? Comprehensive Psychiatry,
46(2), 135–139.
Duclos, J., Vibert, S., Mattar, L., & Godart, N. (2012). Expressed
emotion in families of patients with eating disorders: a review
of the literature. Current Psychiatry Reviews, 8, 183–202.
Goossens, L., Braet, C., Van Durme, K., Decaluwe, V., & Bosmans,
G. (2012). The parent–child relationship as predictor of eating
pathology and weight gain in preadolescents. Journal of Clinical
Child and Adolescent Psychology, 41(4), 445–457.
Hilbert, A. (2013). Cognitive-behavioral therapy for binge eating dis-
order in adolescents: Study protocol for a randomized controlled
trial. Trials, 14, 312.
Hilbert, A., Tuschen-Caffier, B., & Ohms, M. (2004). Eating disorder
examination: Deutschsprachige Version des strukturierten
Essstörungsinterviews. [Eating disorder examination: A German
version of the structured eating disorder interview]. Diagnostica,
50(2), 98–106.
Hodges, E. L., Cochrane, C. E., & Brewerton, T. D. (1998). Family
characteristics of binge-eating disorder patients. Internationl
Journal of Eating Disorders, 23(2), 145–151.
Holtom-Viesel, A., & Allan, S. (2014). A systematic review of the
literature on family functioning across all eating disorder diagno-
ses in comparison to control families. Clinical Psychology Review,
34(1), 29–43.
Lyke, J., & Matsen, J. (2013). Family functioning and risk factors for
disordered eating. Eating Behaviors, 14(4), 497–499.
McDermott, B. M., Batik, M., Roberts, L., & Gibbon, P. (2002).
Parent and child report of family functioning in a clinical child
and adolescent eating disorders sample. Australian and New
Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36(4), 509–514.
McGrane, D., & Carr, A. (2002). Young women at risk for eating dis-
orders: Perceived family dysfunction and parental psychological
problems. Contemporary Family Therapy, 24(2), 385–395.
Olson, D. H. (1985). FACES III. University of Minnesota.
Schmidt, R., Tetzlaff, A., & Hilbert, A. (2015). Perceived expressed
emotion in adolescents with binge-eating disorder. Journal of
Abnormal Child Psychology, 43(7), 1369–1377.
Shisslak, C. M., McKeon, R. T., & Crago, M. (1990). Family dysfunc-
tion in normal weight bulimic and bulimic anorexic families.
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 46(2), 185–189.
Skinner, H. A., Steinhauer, P. D., & Santa-Barbara, J. (1983). The
Family Assessment Measure. Canadian Journal of Community
Mental Health, 2(2), 91–105.
Steinberg, L. (1987). Impact of puberty on family relations: Effects
of pubertal status and pubertal timing. Developmental Psychology,
23(3), 451–460.
Swanson, S. A., Crow, S. J., Le Grange, D., Swendsen, J., &
Merikangas, K. R. (2011). Prevalence and correlates of eating
disorders in adolescents. Results from the national comorbidity
survey replication adolescent supplement. Archives of General
Psychiatry, 68(7), 714–723.
Tetzlaff, A., & Hilbert, A. (2014). Zur Rolle der Familie bei
Essanfällen im Kindes- und Jugendalter. [The role of the family
in childhood and adolescent binge eating. A systematic review].
Zeitschrift für Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie und Psychotherapie,
42(1), 61–70.
Tomori, M., & Rus-Makovec, M. (2000). Eating behavior, depres-
sion, and self-esteem in high school students. Journal of Adoles-
cent Health, 26(5), 361–367.
Waller, G., Calam, R., & Slade, P. (1989). Eating disorders and family
interaction. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28 ( Pt 3),
285–286.
Wertheim, E. H., Paxton, S. J., Maude, D., Szmukler, G. I., Gibbons,
K., & Hillier, L. (1992). Psychosocial predictors of weight loss be-
haviors and binge eating in adolescent girls and boys. Interna-
tional Journal of Eating Disorders, 12(2), 151–160.
Wisotsky, W., Dancyger, I., Fornari, V., Katz, J., Wisotsky, W. L.,
& Swencionis, C. (2003). The relationship between eating
pathology and perceived family functioning in eating disorder
patients in a day treatment program. Eating Disorders, 11(2),
89–99.
Woodside, D. B., Shekter-Wolfson, L., Garfinkel, P. E., Olmsted,
M. P., Kaplan, A. S., & Maddocks, S. E. (1995). Family interac-
tions in bulimia nervosa I: Study design, comparisons to
established population norms, and changes over the course of
an intensive day hospital treatment program. International
Journal of Eating Disorders, 17(2), 105–115.

Eur. Eat. Disorders Rev. 24 (2016) 430–433 © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and Eating Disorders Association. 433