Articles In Press / Online First                   Back to the articles list | Back to browse issues page


XML Print


1- Faculty of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. , vteo2@um.edu.my
2- Faculty of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
3- Department of Physical Education, Institut Pendidikan Guru Kampus Batu Lintang, Kuching, Malaysia.
4- Institute of Health and Wellbeing, Federation University, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia.
5- Department of Physical Education, Institut Pendidikan Guru Kampus Tun Abdul Razak, Kota Samarahan, Malaysia.
Abstract:   (192 Views)
Background. Sports psychologists believe sports commitment is important to indicate the desire to continue or cease participation in sports from a psychosocial perspective. The Sports Commitment Questionnaire-2 (SCQ-2) has been developed and validated to investigate athletes’ commitment in sports settings in Western countries but not in Malaysia. Hence, it is essential to establish instrument validity before being widely used in Malaysia, especially among athletes.
Objectives. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Sports Commitment Questionnaire-2 (SCQ-2) among Malaysian racquet sports athletes.
Methods. This is a cross-sectional study, a total of 416 players (245 males/ 171 females, µ age=29.94±11.47) completed the SCQ-2 (Scanlan et al., 2016) consisting of 58 items measuring ten factors and two dimensions of sports commitment. We examined the psychometric properties of SCQ-2, by conducting Confirmatory Factor Analysis and examined discriminant validity and composite reliability (CR).
Results. Initial fit indices of the hypothesized measurement model did not achieve satisfactory fit. But, after further model modification i.e., deleting 3 items resulted in good data fit (CFI=0.90, RMSEA=0.05, TLI=0.90, X²/df=2.14). Discriminant validity also met the suggested cutoff value (< 0.90). whereas  CR values were acceptable for the subscales ranging from 0.77 to 0.89. Convergent validity (AVE, ranging from 0.50 to 0.58) and discriminant validity (<0.90) were also established.
Conclusion. The SCQ-2 showed adequate validity and reliability which enable sports practitioners to access athletes' commitment in a sports context.
Full-Text [PDF 729 kb]   (64 Downloads)    
 
 
APPLICABLE REMARKS
  • This study confirmed the psychometric properties of SCQ-2 which consists of ten factors and two sport commitment dimensions. Through the validation of SCQ-2 in Malaysia, sports psychologists and practitioners can assess Malaysian athletes’ commitment and the factors that drive them to participate in sports. This could help sports psychologists and practitioners to foster the identified factors by designing a proper and inviting environment for athletes to promote active involvement in sports of athletes. In addition, SCQ-2 is also able to provide useful information on the factors and level of sports commitment before and after a period of the intervention program.

Type of Study: Original Article | Subject: Sport Psychology and its Related Branches
Received: 2023/10/31 | Accepted: 2024/01/6

References
1. 1. Scanlan TK, Simons JP, Carpenter PJ, Schmidt GW, Keeler B. An introduction to the sport commitment model. J Sport Exercise Psy. 1993;15:1-15. [DOI:10.1123/jsep.15.1.1]
2. Berki T, Piko BF, Page RM. The Relationship Between the Models of Sport Commitment and Self-Determination among Adolescent Athletes. Acta Fac Edu. Psy. 2020;52(2):79-95. [DOI:10.2478/afepuc-2019-0007]
3. Sanchez-Miguel PA, Chow GM, Sousa C, Scanlan TK, Ponseti FJ, Scanlan L, Garcia-Mas A. Adapting the Sport Commitment Questionnaire-2 for Spanish Usage. Percep Motor Skills. 2019;126(2):267-85. [DOI:10.1177/0031512518821822] [PMID]
4. Scanlan TK, Chow GM, Sousa C, Scanlan LA, Knifsend CA. The development of the Sport Commitment Questionnaire-2 (English version). Psychol Sport & Exerc. 2016;22:233-46. [DOI:10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.002]
5. Carpenter PJ, Scanlan TK. Changes over time in the determinants of sport commitment. Pediatr Exerc Sci. 1998;10:356-65. [DOI:10.1123/pes.10.4.356]
6. Frayeh AL, Lewis BA. Sport Commitment Among Adult Recreational Soccer Players: Test of an Expanded Model. Int J Exerc Sci. 2017;10(1):4-24.
7. Weiss MR, Kimmel LA, Smith AL. Determinants of sport commitment among junior tennis players: Enjoyment as a mediating variable. Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2001;13(2):131-44. [DOI:10.1123/pes.13.2.131]
8. Casper JM, Stellino MB. Demographic Predictors of Recreational Tennis Participants' Sport Commitment. J Park Recr Admin. 2008;26(3):95-115.
9. Weiss WM, Weiss MR. Attraction-and Entrapment-Based Commitment Among Competitive Female Gymnasts. J Sport Exercise Psy. 2003;25(2):229-47. [DOI:10.1123/jsep.25.2.229]
10. Casper JM, Gray DP, Stellino, MB. A Sport Commitment Model Perspective on Adult Tennis Players' Participation Frequency and Purchase Intention. Sport Manag Rev. 2007;10:253-78. [DOI:10.1016/S1441-3523(07)70014-1]
11. Chairat C, Naruepon V, Li F, Harmer P. (2009). The Sport Commitment Model: An Investigation of Structural Relationships with Thai Youth Athlete Populations. Meas Phy Education Exercise Sci. 2009;13(3): 123-39. [DOI:10.1080/10913670903039563]
12. Wigglesworth JC, Young BW, Medic N, Grove JR. Examining gender differences in the determinants of Masters Swimmers' sport commitment. Int J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2012;10(3):236-50. [DOI:10.1080/1612197X.2012.691232]
13. Alexandris K, Zahariadis P, Tsorbatzoudis C, Grouios G. Testing the sport commitment model in the context of exercise and fitness participation. J Sport Behav. 2002;25(3):217-30.
14. Weiss, WM. Competitive-level differences on sport commitment among high school- and collegiate-level athletes. Int J Sport Exerc Psychol, 2015;13(3),286-303. [DOI:10.1080/1612197X.2014.958517]
15. Wang CH, Chu, A. Older adults' participation in ballroom dancing: Practical application of the sport commitment model. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 2016;44(3):445-452. [DOI:10.2224/sbp.2016.44.3.445]
16. Bandalos DL, Leite W. Use of Monte Carlo Studies in Structural Equation Modeling. In G. R. Hancock, & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural Equation Modeling: A Second Course (2nd ed). Charlotte, NC: IAP; 2013. p. 625-666.
17. Forero CG, Maydeu-Olivares A, Gallardo-Pujol, D. Factor Analysis with Ordinal Indicators: A Monte Carlo Study Comparing DWLS and ULS Estimation. Structural Equation Modeling, 2009;16:625-641. [DOI:10.1080/10705510903203573]
18. Hu, L.-t., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling. 1999;6(1), 1-55. [DOI:10.1080/10705519909540118]
19. Finney SJ, DiStefano C. Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In: Hancock GR, Mueller RO(Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course. Information Age Publishing; 2006. p. 269-314.
20. Arbuckle TE, Schrader SM, Cole D, Hall JC, Bancej CM, Turner LA, Claman P. (1999). 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid residues in semen of Ontario farmers. Reprod Toxicol. 1999;13(6):421-29. [DOI:10.1016/S0890-6238(99)00057-X] [PMID]
21. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson, RE, Tatham R. Multivariate Data Analysis. Pearson Education; 2010.
22. Browne, MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Bollen, KA, Long JS [Eds.] Testing structural equation models. Sage;1993.
23. Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen M. Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods. 2007;6(1), 53-60.
24. Henseler J, Ringle, CM, Sarstedt M. A New Criterion for Assessing Discriminant Validity in Variance-based Structural Equation Modeling. J Acad Mark Sci. 2015;43:115-135. [DOI:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8]
25. Raykov T., Marcoulides GA. Scale reliability evaluation in heterogeneous populations. Educ Psychol Meas. 2015;75:875-92. [DOI:10.1177/0013164414558587] [PMID] []
26. Costello AB, Osborne JW. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research, & Evaluation, 2005;10:1-9.
27. Anderson J., Gerbing, D. Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach. Psychological Bulletin, 1998;103, 411-423. [DOI:10.1037//0033-2909.103.3.411]
28. Bagozzi RP, Yi Y. On the Evaluation of Structure Equation Models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 1998;16:76-94. [DOI:10.1007/BF02723327]

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Annals of Applied Sport Science

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb