...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Psychology of sport and exercise >Comparing sport motivation scales: A response to Pelletier et al.
【24h】

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

机译：比较运动动机量表：对Pelletier等人的回应。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Pelletier, 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. Conclusions: Both 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.
机译：Pelletier，Rocchi，Vallerand，Deci和Ryan（2013）提出了新版《运动动机量表》（SMS; Pelletier，Fortier，Vallerand，Tuson和Blais，1995），以衡量运动中不同类型的行为法规，正如自决理论所述（Ryan＆Deci，2000）。他们研究了量表评分的可靠性和有效性的各个方面，并得出结论，新量表的性能优于原始量表。他们还声称，SMS-II优于其他运动动机度量，包括由Lonsdale，Hodge和Rose（2008）开发的运动问卷中的行为调节（BRSQ）。通过比较Pelletier等人在论文中提出的证据。和Lonsdale等人，我们的目标是研究这两种方法的相对优缺点，并为体育动机测量的未来研究提供方向。结论：SMS-II和BRSQ都显示出相对的优点和缺点。总体而言，从两种方法得出的分数的结构效度证据相似。没有足够的信息来支持一种规模优于另一种规模的说法。鼓励研究人员通过对未来研究中的同一组参与者实施两种措施来进行直接比较。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号