| Literature DB >> 18489736 |
Yngvar Ommundsen1, Angie Page, Po-Wen Ku, Ashley R Cooper.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the construct validity of a computerised self-assessment tool to measure psychological, social and environmental influences of young peoples' physical activity. First, analyses of the measure's factorial validity, invariance across, age, gender culture were conducted. Second, the ability of the derived subscales to discriminate between children representing different levels of self-reported and objectively measured physical activity behaviour was examined.Entities:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18489736 PMCID: PMC2430583 DOI: 10.1186/1479-5868-5-29
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act ISSN: 1479-5868 Impact factor: 6.457
Summary of perceived personal, social and environmental measures based on confirmatory factor analysis
| Brustad(1993) | |
| Harter(1978) | |
| I have more fun playing games and sports than doing other things | |
| Playing games and sports is the thing I like to do best. | |
| I wish I could play more games and sports than I get chance to. | |
| I usually prefer to watch rather than play games | |
| I really like doing PE at school. | |
| I feel that I am better than most other kids my age at games and sports. | |
| I feel really bad when I get out of breath from running around | |
| I feel that I can easily keep up with other kids when playing games and sports. | |
| Trost et al(1997) | |
| Be fun | |
| Help me make new friends | |
| Help me be with my friends more | |
| Help me look good to others | |
| Get or keep me in shape | |
| Make me better in sports | |
| Help me be healthy | |
| Help me control my weight | |
| Give me energy | |
| Sallis et al.(1999) | |
| Take you to exercise or play sports | |
| Watch you take part in exercise or sports | |
| Exercise or play sports with you | |
| Tell you to exercise or play sports | |
| Tell you that exercise is good for your health | |
| How often do your friends exercise or play sports with you? | |
| How often do you ask your friends to play out with you? | |
| How often do your friends ask you to play out with them? | |
| Items for teacher support generated through pilot study | |
| Talk about exercise in lessons | |
| Organise or play games with you apart from PE | |
| Tell you to exercise or play sports | |
| Sallis et al.(1999 | |
| Trost et al(1997) | |
| It is safe to walk or play alone in my neighbourhood during the day. | |
| There are other children near by home to go out and play with | |
| There is somewhere at home I can go out and play | |
| There are playgrounds or parks close to my home where I can play | |
| At school there are playgrounds or fields where I can run around | |
| I always have to tell my parents where I am when I go out | |
| If I am going out I always have to be back by a certain time |
Tests for Factorial Invariance of the Four Models across Different Genders: Goodness-of-Fit Statistics
| Model | S-B χ2 | Df | CFIa | Changes in CFIa | RMSEA (90%CI)a | SRMRa |
| 1: Configual model | 131.55 | 33 | 0.94 | 0.05(0.04–0.06) | 0.04 | |
| 2: Measurement model | 169.73 | 40 | 0.93 | 0.01 | 0.05(0.04–0.06) | 0.04 |
| Partial measurement modelb | 154.79 | 38 | 0.94 | 0.00 | 0.05(0.04–0.06) | 0.04 |
| 3. Structural model | 163.66 | 39 | 0.93 | 0.01 | 0.05(0.04–0.06) | 0.04 |
| 1: Configual model | 168.42 | 49 | 0.94 | 0.04(0.04–0.05) | 0.04 | |
| 2: Measurement model | 179.11 | 56 | 0.93 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.04 |
| 3. Structural model | 181.28 | 57 | 0.93 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.04 |
| 1: Configual model | 237.92 | 74 | 0.98 | 0.04(0.03–0.04) | 0.03 | |
| 2: Measurement model | 248.82 | 81 | 0.97 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.03–0.04) | 0.04 |
| 3. Structural model | 257.70 | 86 | 0.97 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.03–0.04) | 0.04 |
| 1: Configual model | 69.76 | 21 | 0.96 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.03 | |
| 2: Measurement model | 74.60 | 25 | 0.96 | 0.00 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.03 |
| 3. Structural model | 78.06 | 28 | 0.96 | 0.00 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.03 |
Based on the univariate χ2 incremental values (p < 0.05)
a: The cut-off points of model fit: CFI greater than .90, Changes in CFI equal or less than 0.01, the point estimate of RMSEA less than 0.05 and the 90%CI of RMSEA less than 0.08, SRMR less than 0.08.
b: Equality constraints related to item Enjoy3 and item Comp3 were removed sequentially
Tests for Factorial Invariance of the Four Models across Different Age Groups: Goodness-of-Fit Statistics
| Model | S-B χ2 | Df | CFIa | Changes in CFIa | RMSEA (90%CI)a | SRMRa |
| 1: Configual model | 138.11 | 30 | 0.95 | 0.05(0.04–0.06) | 0.03 | |
| 2: Measurement model | 177.06 | 37 | 0.93 | 0.02 | 0.05(0.04–0.06) | 0.04 |
| Partial measurement modelb | 152.00 | 34 | 0.94 | 0.01 | 0.05(0.04–0.06) | 0.04 |
| 3. Structural model | 151.80 | 35 | 0.94 | 0.01 | 0.05(0.04–0.06) | 0.04 |
| 1: Configual model | 148.87 | 49 | 0.95 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.03 | |
| 2: Measurement model | 206.11 | 56 | 0.92 | 0.03 | 0.04(0.04–0.05) | 0.05 |
| Partial measurement modelc | 172.05 | 54 | 0.94 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.04 |
| 3. Structural model | 196.65 | 55 | 0.93 | 0.02 | 0.04(0.04–0.05) | 0.05 |
| 1: Configual model | 249.55 | 76 | 0.97 | 0.04(0.04–0.05) | 0.03 | |
| 2: Measurement model | 296.44 | 83 | 0.96 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.04–0.05) | 0.04 |
| Partial measurement modeld | 253.31 | 81 | 0.97 | 0.00 | 0.04(0.03–0.04) | 0.03 |
| 3. Structural model | 281.42 | 87 | 0.96 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.04–0.05) | 0.05 |
| 1: Configual model | 54.93 | 20 | 0.97 | 0.04(0.02–0.05) | 0.03 | |
| 2: Measurement model | 72.25 | 24 | 0.96 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.03 |
| Partial measurement modele | 68.13 | 23 | 0.96 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.03 |
| 3. Structural model | 104.83 | 26 | 0.94 | 0.03 | 0.05(0.04–0.06) | 0.03 |
Based on the univariate χ2 incremental values (p < 0.05)
a: The cut-off points of model fit: CFI greater than .90, Changes in CFI equal or less than 0.01, the point estimate of RMSEA less than 0.05 and the 90%CI of RMSEA less than 0.08, SRMR less than 0.08.
b: Equality constraints related to item Enjoy3 and item Enjoy5 were removed sequentially
c: Equality constraints related to item Socbel3 and item Socbel4 were removed sequentially
d: Equality constraints related to item Parsupp3 and item Teacher2 were removed sequentially
e: Equality constraints related to item Opp2 were removed
Tests for Factorial Invariance of the Four Models across Four European Countries: Goodness-of-Fit Statistics
| Model | S-B χ2 | Df | CFIa | Changes in CFIa | RMSEA (90%CI)a | SRMRa |
| 1: Configual model | 160.81 | 64 | 0.96 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.04 | |
| 2: Measurement model | 318.88 | 86 | 0.91 | 0.05 | 0.05(0.05–0.06) | 0.07 |
| Partial measurement modelb | 229.22 | 83 | 0.95 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.04–0.05) | 0.04 |
| 3. Structural model | 233.66 | 86 | 0.95 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.04–0.05) | 0.05 |
| 1: Configual model | 234.80 | 95 | 0.93 | 0.04(0.04–0.05) | 0.04 | |
| 2: Measurement model | 315.52 | 119 | 0.91 | 0.02 | 0.05(0.04–0.05) | 0.06 |
| Partial measurement modelc | 280.04 | 113 | 0.92 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.04–0.05) | 0.05 |
| 3. Structural model | 297.20 | 116 | 0.92 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.04–0.05) | 0.06 |
| 1: Configual model | 261.03 | 152 | 0.98 | 0.03(0.02–0.04) | 0.03 | |
| 2: Measurement model | 344.88 | 173 | 0.96 | 0.02 | 0.03(0.03–0.04) | 0.04 |
| Partial measurement modeld | 294.62 | 167 | 0.98 | 0.00 | 0.03(0.03–0.04) | 0.04 |
| 3. Structural model | 374.84 | 182 | 0.97 | 0.01 | 0.04(0.03–0.04) | 0.06 |
| 1: Configual model | 68.91 | 44 | 0.98 | 0.03(0.01–0.04) | 0.03 | |
| 2: Measurement model | 123.33 | 56 | 0.95 | 0.03 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.04 |
| Partial measurement modele | 111.70 | 53 | 0.95 | 0.03 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.04 |
| 3. Structural model | 135.28 | 62 | 0.94 | 0.04 | 0.04(0.03–0.05) | 0.05 |
Based on the univariate χ2 incremental values (p < 0.05)
a: The cut-off points of model fit: CFI greater than 0.90, Changes in CFI equal or less than 0.01, the point estimate of RMSEA less than 0.05 and the 90%CI of RMSEA less than 0.08, SRMR less than 0.08.
b: Equality constraints related to item Enjoy 4 and item Enjoy3 were removed sequentially
c: Equality constraints related to item Socbel 2 and item Socbel 3 were removed sequentially
d: Equality constraints related to item Parsupp 3 and item Friend 2 were removed sequentially
e: Equality constraints related to item Opp 2 was removed
Inter-correlations between perceived personal, social and environmental correlates and alpha estimates
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | α | |
| 1. Enjoyment | - | 0.30** | 0.17** | 0.21** | 0.31** | 0.17** | 0.28** | 0.32** | 0.09** | 0.01 | 0.12** | 0.57 (0.51–0.62) |
| 2. Perceived competence | - | 0.16** | 0.09** | 0.18** | 0.01 | 0.16** | 0.17** | 0.16** | -0.08** | -0.05** | 0.33 (0.30–0.41) | |
| 3. Parental support | - | 0.37** | 0.37** | 0.26** | 0.17** | 0.12** | 0.10** | 0.11** | 0.15** | 0.63 (0.57–0.67) | ||
| 4. Parental encouragement | - | 0.31** | 0.27** | 0.16** | 0.17** | 0.08** | 0.02 | 0.12** | 0.50 (0.45–0.53)# | |||
| 5. Social support from friends | - | 0.29** | 0.24** | 0.16** | 0.20** | 0.06** | 0.13** | 0.76 (0.73–0.79) | ||||
| 6. Teacher social support | - | 0.12** | 0.05* | -0.05 | 0.15** | 0.14** | 0.68 (0.63–0.67) | |||||
| 7. Social outcome expectations | - | 0.48** | 0.09** | 0.10** | 0.10** | 0.55 (0.44–0.65) | ||||||
| 8. Functional outcome expectations | - | 0.12** | -0.01* | 0.09** | 0.58 (0.52–0.66) | |||||||
| 9. Opportunity | - | -0.16** | 0.02 | 0.44 (0.12–0.57) | ||||||||
| 10. Facility | - | 0.22** | 0.20 (0.08–0.29)# | |||||||||
| 11. Licence | - | 0.45 (0.25–0.54)# |
Note: ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) α range between countries in parenthesis # inter-correlations for two-item measures
Means, standard deviations, P values and Sheffe's post-hoc comparison test results on perceived personal, social, and environmental correlates by stage of physical activity behaviour change
| Stage of Physical Activity Behaviour Change | ||||||
| Pre-contemplation (n = 104) M (SD) | Contemplation (n = 215) M (SD) | Preparation (n = 1575) M (SD) | Action (n = 273) M (SD) | Maintenance (n = 1527) M (SD) | ||
| Enjoyment | 2.10 (0.52) | 2.26 (0.48) | 2.38 (0.40) | 2.53 (0.37) | 2.59 (0.34) | < 0.001a |
| Perceived competence | 1.97 (0.48) | 2.06 (0.48) | 2.11 (0.43) | 2.25 (0.42) | 2.38 (0.41) | < 0.001b |
| Social outcome expectations | 2.30 (0.47) | 2.36 (0.47) | 2.37 (0.41) | 2.45 (0.44) | 2.49 (0.39) | < 0.001c |
| Functional outcome expectations | 2.57 (0.45) | 2.65 (0.36) | 2.70 (0.32) | 2.75 (0.32) | 2.80 (0.28) | < 0.001d |
| Parental support | 1.44 (0.60) | 1.35 (0.58) | 1.32 (0.47) | 1.48 (0.61) | 1.56 (0.58) | < 0.001e |
| Parental encouragement | 1.95 (0.84) | 1.91 (0.84) | 1.93 (0.77) | 2.16 (0.87) | 2.11 (0.88) | < 0.001f |
| Social support from friends | 1.98 (0.77) | 1.86 (0.83) | 1.93 (0.70) | 2.22 (0.82) | 2.32 (0.73) | < 0.001g |
| Teacher social support | 1.60 (0.65) | 1.63 (0.65) | 1.52 (0.55) | 1.65 (0.67) | 1.58 (0.64) | 0.002* |
| Opportunity | 2.46 (0.52) | 2.50 (0.54) | 2.52 (0.49) | 2.60 (0.47) | 2.69 (0.45) | < 0.001h |
| Facility | 1.51 (0.57) | 1.46 (0.56) | 1.40 (0.51) | 1.44 (0.56) | 1.37 (0.52) | < 0.01i |
| Licence | 2.46 (0.63) | 2.30 (0.69) | 2.34 (0.65) | 2.36 (0.66) | 2.37 (0.64) | 0.144 |
a) precon/con/prep
*Note: No significant differences revealed through Sheffe's post-hoc test for teacher social support