Comparing sport motivation scales: A response to Pelletier et al.

ObjectivesPelletier, Rocchi, Vallerand, Deci, and Ryan (2013) proposed a new version of the Sport Motivation Scale (SMS; Pelletier, Fortier, Vallerand, Tuson, & Blais, 1995) as a measure of different types of behavioral regulations in sport, as outlined in self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000). They examined various aspects of reliability and validity of scale scores, and concluded that the new scale performs better than the original version. They also claimed that the SMS-II is superior to other measures of motivation in sport, including the Behavioral Regulation in Sport Questionnaire (BRSQ) developed by Lonsdale, Hodge, and Rose (2008). By comparing the evidence presented in papers by Pelletier et al. and Lonsdale et al., our objective was to examine the relative merits and shortcomings of the two measures and suggest directions for future research into sport motivation measurement.ConclusionsBoth the SMS-II and BRSQ have shown relative strengths and weaknesses. Overall, the construct validity evidence of scores derived from the two measures was similar. There is insufficient information to support the claim that one scale is superior to the other. Researchers are encouraged to make direct comparisons by administering both measures to the same group of participants in future studies.     

Some thoughts on Likert-type scales

Many articles published in the International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology describe the results obtained in studies that have used Likert-type scales. Such scales have advantages and disadvantages and in this article I comment on some of these. In particular I comment on the effects of using scales that start with the positive end and finish with the negative one, and on those that present high ratings on the left - as opposed to the right. I also consider that scores on negatively-worded items differ from those obtained on positively-worded ones and that it is not, therefore, appropriate to simply reverse the scores obtained on such items. Finally, I note that some items on these scales present more than one issue and it is hard to know whether when responding to these items, respondents are responding to all of the item or just one part.     

Fathers' and mothers' attachment representations as predictors of preadolescents' attachment security: A ten‐year follow‐up of Finnish families

The question of how mothers' and fathers' representations of attachment correlate ten years later with children's perceptions of attachment relationships was examined in a longitudinal study on Finnish families (N = 42). The parents completed the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) during the child's first year of life. At 11 years, the children filled out three scales on how secure they perceive the relationship with each parent. Parents' AAI classifications and AAI dimensions based on continuous scales were used as predictors of the preadolescents' attachment security. Regression analyses demonstrated that fathers' but not mothers' State‐of‐Mind and Experience dimensions predicted preadolescents' security of attachment to father. The discussion focuses on the predictive validity of the classical categorical versus the recently proposed continuous approach and the different roles of parents in transmitting security from one generation to another.     

Chinese sex differences in intelligence: Some new evidence

Sex differences on the WISC-R in Chinese children were examined in a sample of 788 aged 12 years. Boys obtained a higher mean full scale IQ than girls of 3.75 IQ points, a higher performance IQ of 4.20 IQ points, and a higher verbal IQ of 2.40 IQ points. Boys obtained significantly higher means on the information, picture arrangement, picture completion, block design, and object assembly subtests, while girls obtained a significantly higher mean on coding. The results were in general similar to the sex differences in the United States standardisation sample of the WISC-R. Boys showed greater variability than girls.     

Comparing the psychosocial health of tattooed and non-tattooed women

Tattooing, particularly for women, has often been considered a marker of psychopathology and deviance. The present study questions this association and hypothesises that tattooed women will be as psychosocially healthy as non-tattooed women, using generativity as a measure of psychosocial health. Generativity refers to the physical or ideological legacy that one will leave to future generations, and is theoretically and empirically associated with psychological health and pro-social behaviour. This study employed an internet survey of 710 females (age range 18–69, M = 26.49, SD = 10.11) and sought to explore: (1) whether there were differences between tattooed and non-tattooed women on generativity as measured by the Loyola Generativity Scale, and (2) whether women with tattoos would evidence the same pattern of significant relationships between generativity and the theoretically and empirically salient variables of age, relationship and parental status, as non-tattooed respondents. Results indicated that tattooed women were just as generative as non-tattooed women. Both groups also evidenced the same patterns of significant relationships between generativity and age, relationship and parental status.     

Reconnaissance au travail : validation d’une échelle de mesure dans le contexte des entreprises

IntroductionTo our knowledge, there is a lack of reliable measurement tools to assess different dimensions of recognition in the organizational context. As a consequence, quantitative studies in the area are still lacking.ObjectivesThe aim of this study is to propose a measuring instrument of recognition at work showing valid and satisfactory psychometric properties.MethodsTwo cross-sectional studies were conducted in this research. The data collected by questionnaire were processed by SPSS17.0 software for exploratory factor analysis and EQS 6.1 for confirmatory factor analyzes.ResultsThe results show that in organizational context, there may be 3 sources of recognition that have to be taken into consideration: the organization itself, superiors and colleagues.ConclusionThis study extend prior research on the measurement of recognition at work. A validated tool based on the most rigorous validation methods and the latest methodological advances, in particular by confirmatory factor analyzes, has then been created.     

Job performance ratings: The relative importance of mental ability,conscientiousness, and career adaptability

According to career construction theory, continuous adaptation to the work environment is crucial to achieve work and career success. In this study, we examined the relative importance of career adaptability for job performance ratings using an experimental policy-capturing design. Employees (N = 135) from different vocational backgrounds rated the overall job performance of fictitious employees in 40 scenarios based on information about their career adaptability, mental ability, conscientiousness, and job complexity. We used multilevel modeling to investigate the relative importance of each factor. Consistent with expectations, career adaptability positively predicted job performance ratings, and this effect was relatively smaller than the effects of conscientiousness and mental ability. Job complexity did not moderate the effect of career adaptability on job performance ratings, suggesting that career adaptability predicts job performance ratings in high-, medium-, and low-complexity jobs. Consistent with previous research, the effect of mental ability on job performance ratings was stronger in high- compared to low-complexity jobs. Overall, our findings provide initial evidence for the predictive validity of employees' career adaptability with regard to other people's ratings of job performance.     

Career Decision Ambiguity Tolerance Scale: Construction and initial validations

The Career Decision Ambiguity Tolerance Scale (CDAT) measures individual evaluations of and responses to ambiguity encountered in career decision making. It was developed and initially validated through two studies of college students. An exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis consistently showed a three-factor structure for career decision ambiguity tolerance, consisting of preference, tolerance, and aversion. In addition to support for construct validity and subscale reliabilities, the findings also support the scale's incremental validity in predicting career indecision, career decision-making self-efficacy, and career adaptability over and beyond general ambiguity tolerance. The theoretical meaning and practical application of the CDAT were discussed along with its limitations and suggestions for future research.