Development and Validation of a Scale for Measuring Stigma Towards Food Insecurity and Food Pantry Utilization Among College Students

Background and Purpose: Best estimates suggest up to 40% of college students experience food insecurity, which is of great concern given the negative impact of food insecurity on mental health and educational outcomes. A wealth of evidence shows that stigma is a major obstacle to accessing social supports and food resources. Previous studies have employed varying measurement approaches to assess the stigma associated with campus food pantry use and food insecurity, but there is no standardized or largely agreed-upon instrument available. Developing a valid and reliable measure of stigma could offer valuable insights into understanding and mitigating barriers to food pantry access, thereby enhancing the overall well-being of college students. This study aims to develop and assess the psychometric properties of a new stigma scale designed to assess the experiences of stigma within the context of food insecurity.

Methods: Drawing from previous research on campus food insecurity, as well as stigma in mental health, we conceptualized stigma as feelings of shame and anticipation of discrimination that inhibit students from disclosing food insecurity and/or accessing food pantry use and other campus resources. Informed by the Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness (ISMI; Ritsher et al., 2003) scale and recent studies, we adapted 19 items (4-point Likert-scale) to assess feelings and experiences with food insecurity and food assistance programs, such as college pantries, SNAP benefits, or other community resources. Partnering with a college pantry, we collected self-administered online survey data from 120 students who used food pantry services at a large public, urban university during the 2023-2024 academic year. To evaluate psychometric properties, we examined: (1) latent structure using a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), (2) internal consistency reliability, and (3) convergent validity with the original ISMI scale (in a subgroup of students who self-identified with mental health concerns).

Results: The majority of our sample consisted of students from minority and underrepresented backgrounds, consistent with the demographic characteristics of those who experience food insecurity as reported in existing literature. Our analyses identified a three-factor CFA model comprising 15 items for the final solution, eliminating four items to reduce redundancy and ambiguity in the scale. The final model showed acceptable model fit (χ²(87) = 150.909, p< .001; RMSEA = .078, 90% CI: 0.057~0.099; CFI = .988; TLI = .985, SRMR= 0.056). The three factors included: alienation (devaluing and shame; six items); perceived discrimination (six items); and stigma resistance (three items). All items showed strong internal consistency overall (Cronbach’s alpha=.91). Also, our measure exhibited a significant and positive correlation with the original ISMI (r=.67), affirming convergent validity.

Discussion and Implications: The findings suggest that our adapted scale is overall a reliable and valid instrument for identifying stigma related to food insecurity and campus food pantry utilization among college students. We will delve into potential applications and address the challenges encountered during the development of this valuable instrument for assessing stigma.

[Reference: Ritsher et al. (2003). Internalized stigma of mental illness: psychometric properties of a new measure. Psychiatry Research, 121(1)]