The development of the Sport Commitment Questionnaire-2 (English version) |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Psychology, UCLA, USA;2. Department of Educational Psychology and Learning Systems, Florida State University, USA;3. Department of Psychology, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Spain;4. Department of Psychology, California State University, Sacramento, USA;1. University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands;3. Utrecht University Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands;4. University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia;5. Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands;1. School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science, Curtin University, Australia;2. School of Sport Science, Exercise & Health, The University of Western Australia, Australia;1. Sultan Qaboos University, Oman;2. University of Birmingham, United Kingdom;1. School of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia;2. Centre for Health Initiatives, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia;3. Early Start Research Institute, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia;1. School of Sport Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Epinal Way, Loughborough, Leicestershire, LE11 3TU, UK;2. Research Institute for Sport and Exercise, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT2601, Australia;3. Chimp Management, Newlyn, Crossings Rd, Chapel-en-le Frith, Derbyshire SK239RY, UK;4. University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK |
| |
| Abstract: | ObjectivesThe purpose of this research was to develop the Sport Commitment Questionnaire-2 (SCQ-2) and establish its psychometric properties. The SCQ-2 measures the updated Sport Commitment Model (SCM: Scanlan, Russell, Scanlan, Klunchoo, & Chow, 2013) and replaces the outdated Sport Commitment Questionnaire (SCQ) that assessed the original SCM (Scanlan, Simons, Carpenter, Schmidt, & Keeler, 1993).DesignBased on prior commitment research, items were generated to refine and expand the original SCQ subscales and to measure new candidate constructs to the SCM. A multiphase study was then conducted.MethodsPhase 1 participants were 753 male/female adolescent athletes (ages 13–19 years) from six sports representing varying levels of task interdependence. Using similar methodology as Phase 1, Phase 2 assessed 982 male/female adolescent athletes.ResultsExploratory factor analysis of Phase 1 data revealed 13 factors: two types of commitment (Enthusiastic and Constrained) and 11 sources. Confirmatory factor analysis of Phase 2 data supported a 58-item, 12-factor structure. In addition, all subscales were internally consistent. Structural equation modeling revealed that the sources explained 81.8% of the variance in Enthusiastic Commitment and 63.9% in Constrained Commitment.ConclusionsThe SCQ-2 assesses the sources and types of commitment in the updated SCM. Based on several indices of fit and the composite reliabilities, psychometric support for the SCQ-2 was established. |
| |
| Keywords: | Constrained Commitment Enthusiastic Commitment mixed-methods research Sport Commitment Model Sport Enjoyment |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
