Hagan John Elvis, Quansah Frank, Ankomah Francis, Agormedah Edmond Kwesi, Srem-Sai Medina, Schack Thomas
Department of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast, Ghana.
Neurocognition and Action-Biomechanics-Research Group, Faculty of Psychology and, Sports Science, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.
Front Psychol. 2022 Dec 22;13:1038217. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1038217. eCollection 2022.
Despite the widespread use of the sports emotion questionnaire (SEQ) in several studies, it is surprising that only a few have explicitly tested the validity and utility of the instrument in non-western populations. Besides, the issue of dimensionality and the latent structure of the instrument remain inconclusive given that several authors have revealed different factor structures across diverse populations. The central concern is whether the items on the various dimensions, proposed for the original SEQ, offer adequate information to their respective expected subscale or otherwise. This study assessed the underlying latent structure of the SEQ using confirmatory and bifactor multidimensional item response (MIRT) models.
Through a well-designed validation study 300 athletes from three West African countries, participating in the 2018 West African University Games were surveyed to respond to the SEQ. The data were analyzed using first, a 5-factor confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) via the MIRT model and second, a bifactor MIRT analysis.
The results revealed that items on the SEQ were fairly good in measuring the construct under the respective domains of the instrument. However, the outcome of the bifactor model showed that the majority of the items on the SEQ explained common variance in relation to the general factor other than the specific domains (5-dimensions).
Findings of the bifactor model question whether the sub-dimensions of the SEQ are needed since most of the items on the SEQ explained larger variances in the general factor than any of the five domains. It is concluded that instruments like SEQ should be scored for a general factor and not as sub-dimensions. Further investigations are encouraged by scholars within the area to probe the dimensionality of the SEQ.
尽管体育情感问卷(SEQ)在多项研究中被广泛使用,但令人惊讶的是,只有少数研究明确测试了该工具在非西方人群中的有效性和实用性。此外,鉴于几位作者在不同人群中揭示了不同的因素结构,该工具的维度问题和潜在结构仍然没有定论。核心问题是,针对原始SEQ提出的各个维度上的项目是否能为其各自预期的子量表提供足够的信息,反之亦然。本研究使用验证性和双因素多维度项目反应(MIRT)模型评估了SEQ的潜在结构。
通过一项精心设计的验证性研究,对来自三个西非国家、参加2018年西非大学运动会的300名运动员进行了调查,以回应SEQ。首先通过MIRT模型进行五因素验证性因素分析(CFA),其次进行双因素MIRT分析,对数据进行分析。
结果显示,SEQ上的项目在测量该工具各自领域下的结构方面相当不错。然而,双因素模型的结果表明,SEQ上的大多数项目解释的是与一般因素相关的共同方差,而非特定领域(五个维度)的方差。
双因素模型的结果对SEQ的子维度是否必要提出了质疑,因为SEQ上的大多数项目在一般因素中解释的方差比五个领域中的任何一个都要大。得出的结论是,像SEQ这样的工具应该根据一般因素进行评分,而不是作为子维度。该领域的学者应进一步开展调查,以探究SEQ的维度。