Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T18:36:10.366Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Confirmatory Factorial Analysis of the Brazilian Version of the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

Eduarda Maria Coelho ,
José Vasconcelos-Raposo  and
Álvaro Cielo Mahl
Eduarda Maria Coelho*
Affiliation:
Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro (Portugal)
José Vasconcelos-Raposo
Affiliation:
Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro (Portugal)
Álvaro Cielo Mahl
Affiliation:
Universidade do Oeste de Santa Catarina (Brazil)
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Eduarda Maria Coelho. Rua Dr. Manuel Cardona. 5000-558 Vila Real. (Portugal). E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the factorial structure of the Brazilian version of CSAI-2, using several structures suggested in previous studies. Two samples consisted of Brazilian soccer players, 266 from regional level (age 22.87 ± 4.08 years; athletic experience 11.32 ± 4.15 years) and 263 from national level (age 23.16 ± 4.37 years; athletic experience 11.11 ± 4.78 years) were used. The CSAI-2 is a 27-item inventory that measures negativism, physiological activation and self-confidence in a competitive setting. The results of CFA according to the original structure showed some inadequacy of the model. The model proposed by Cox, Martens, Russell (2003), composed of three factors (17-item), demonstrated better adjustment to the regional level sample (χ2/df = 1.871, CFI = .934, GFI = .916, RMSEA = .057), while the model suggested by Coelho, Vasconcelos-Raposo, Fernandes (2007), composed of two factors (18-item), adapted better to the national level sample (χ2/df = 1.701, CFI = .924, GFI = .914, RMSEA = .052). When we analyzed the two samples together, Coelho et al. (2007) was the better model, because it displayed greater invariance. The use of this model was suggested in the assessment of intensity of negative thoughts and the subsequent confirmation of its psychometric properties is recommended.

El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la estructura factorial de la versión brasileña del CSAI-2, utilizando las estructuras sugeridas en estudios anteriores. Participaron dos muestras de jugadores de fútbol de Brasil, 266 de nivel regional (edad media = 22,87 ± 4.08 años y experiencia deportiva media = 11,32 ± 4,15 años) y 263 del nivel nacional (edad media = 23,16 ± 4,37 años; experiencia deportiva media = 11,11 ± 4,78 años). El CSAI-2 es un cuestionario compuesto por 27 ítems que miden la negatividad, la activación fisiológica y la auto-confianza en un entorno competitivo. Los resultados del AFC de acuerdo a la estructura original mostraron algunos desajustes del modelo. El modelo propuesto por Cox, Martens y Russell (2003), compuesto de tres factores (17 ítems), demostró un mejor ajuste en la muestra de nivel regional (χ2/df = 1,871, CFI = 0,934, GFI = 0,916, RMSEA = 0,057), mientras que el modelo propuesto por Coelho, Vasconcelos-Raposo y Fernandes (2007), compuesto por dos factores (18 ítems), se ajustó mejor en la muestra de nivel nacional (χ2/df = 1,701, CFI = 0,924, GFI = 0,914, RMSEA = 0,052). Cuando analizamos las dos muestras juntas, el modelo de Coelho et al. (2007) resultó ser mejor, ya que mostró una mayor invarianza. Se sugiere el uso de este modelo en la evaluación de la intensidad de los pensamientos negativos, a la vez que se recomienda la confirmación ulterior de sus propiedades psicométricas.

Keywords

CSAI-2confirmatory factorial analysisBrazilCSAI-2análisis factorial confirmatorioBrasil
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , May 2010 , pp. 453 - 460
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aroian, K., & Norris, A. (2005). Confirmatory factor analysis. In Munro, B. (Ed.), Statistical methods for health care research (5a ed., pp. 351–375): Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
Burton, D. (1998). Measuring competitive state anxiety. In Duda, J. (Ed.), Advances in sport and exercise psychology measurement (pp. 129–148). Morgantown: Fitness Information Technology.Google Scholar
Byrne, B. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications and programming. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Coelho, E., Vasconcelos-Raposo, J., & Fernandes, H. (2007). Análise factorial confirmatória da versão portuguesa do CSAI-2. Motricidade, 3(3), 73–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, R., Martens, M., & Russell, W. (2003). Measuring anxiety in athletics: The revised Competitive State Anxiety Inventory - 2. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 25, 519–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iosifidou, P., & Doganis, G. (2001). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Greek version of the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 32, 400–405.Google Scholar
Jones, G., & Hanton, S. (2001). Pre-competitive feeling states and directional anxiety interpretations. Journal of Sports Sciences, 19, 385–395.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, G., & Swain, A. (1992). Intensity and direction as dimensions of competitive state anxiety and relationships with competitiveness. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 74, 467–472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lane, A., Sewell, D., Terry, P., Bartram, D., & Nesti, M. (1999). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2. Journal of Sports Sciences, 17, 505–512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martens, R. (1977). Sport competition anxiety test. Champaign: Human Kinetics.Google Scholar
Martens, R., Burton, D., Vealey, R., Bump, L., & Smith, D. (1990). Development and validation of the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory - 2 (CSAI-2). In Martens, R., Vealey, R. & Burton, D. (Eds.), Competitive anxiety in sport (pp. 117–213). Champaign: Human Kinetics.Google Scholar
Martens, R., Vealey, R., & Burton, D. (1990). Competitive anxiety in sport. Champaign: Human Kinetics.Google Scholar
Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3a ed.). Northridge: HarperCollins College Publishers.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. (1996). Intensity regulation and athletic performance. In Raalte, J. & Brewer, B. (Eds.), Exploring sport and exercise psychology (pp. 75–106). Washington: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsorbatzoudis, H., Barkoukis, V., Rodafinos, A., & Grouios, G. (1998). A test of the reliability and factorial validity of the Greek version of the CSAI-2. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 69, 416–419.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tsorbatzoudis, H., Barkoukis, V., Sideridis, G., & Grouios, G. (2002). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Greek version of the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory (CSAI-2). International Journal of Sport Psychology, 33, 182–194.Google Scholar
Vasconcelos-Raposo, J. (1994). Explorando as limitações do conceito de ansiedade no desporto. Paper presented at the XIV Congreso de la Asociacion Aragoneza de Tecnicos de Natacion, Zaragosa.Google Scholar
Vasconcelos-Raposo, J. (2000). Explorando as limitações do conceito de ansiedade no desporto. ALEU: Revista de Desporto da UTAD, 2, 47–66.Google Scholar
Vasconcelos-Raposo, J. (Ed.). (1995). Diferenças por classificação no nível de ansiedade cognitiva, somática e auto-confiança: UTAD.Google Scholar