Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T11:52:19.915Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Behavioral Regulation Assessment in Exercise: Exploring an Autonomous and Controlled Motivation Index

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

Luis Cid ,
João Moutão ,
José Leitão  and
José Alves
Luis Cid*
Affiliation:
Escola Superior de Desporto de Rio Maior (Portugal)
João Moutão
Affiliation:
Escola Superior de Desporto de Rio Maior (Portugal)
José Leitão
Affiliation:
Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro (Portugal)
José Alves
Affiliation:
Instituto Superior de Ciências da Saúde do Norte (Portugal)
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Luís Cid. Escola Superior de Desporto de Rio Maior (ESDRM-IPS). Av. Dr. Mário Soares, Pavilhão Multiusos, 2040-413 Rio Maior (Portugal). E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The main purpose of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire (BREQ-2) and to test the hypothesis that the different types of behavioral regulation can be combined on a single factor to assess autonomous and controlled motivation. Data were collected from 550 members of private fitness centres who ranged in age from 14 to 69 years. The analysis supported an 18-item, 5-factor model after excluding one item (S-Bχ2 = 221.7, df = 125, p = .000, S-Bχ2/df = 1.77; SRMR = .06; NNFI = .90; CFI = .92; RMSEA = .04, 90% CI = .03-.05). However, the analysis also revealed a lack of internal consistency. The results of a hierarchical model based on 2 second-order factors that reflected controlled motivation (external and introjected regulation) and autonomous motivation (identified and intrinsic regulation) provided an acceptable fit to the data (S-Bχ2 = 172.6, df = 74, p = .000, SB-χ2/df = 2.33; SRMR = .07; NNFI = .90; CFI = .92; RMSEA= .05, 90% CI = .04-.06), with reliability coefficients of .75 for controlled motivation and .76 for autonomous motivation. The study findings indicated that when item 17 was excluded, the Portuguese BREQ-2 was an appropriate measure of the controlled and autonomous motivation in exercise.

El objetivo principal de este estudio fue examinar las cualidades psicométricas de la versión portuguesa de Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire (BREQ-2) y probar la hipótesis de un modelo jerárquico que permitiese evaluar la motivación autónoma y la motivación controladora a través de un único factor. En el estudio participaron 550 practicantes de ejercicio físico en gimnasios, con edades comprendidas entre los 14 y los 69 años. Los resultados soportan la adecuación de un modelo de 5 factores y 18 ítems, tras la exclusión de un ítem (S-Bχ2 = 221.7; df = 125; p = .000; SB-χ2/df = 1.77; SRMR = .06; NNFI = .90; CFI = .92; RMSEA = .04; 90% IC RMSEA = .03-.05). No obstante, este análisis también reveló la falta de consistencia interna de algunos factores. Los resultados del modelo jerárquico con dos factores de 2º orden, que incluyen la motivación controladora (regulación externa e introyectada) y la motivación autónoma (regulación identificada e intrínseca), revelaron valores de ajuste aceptables (S-Bχ2 = 172.6; df = 74; p = 0.000; S-Bχ2/df = 2.33; SRMR = .07; NNFI = .90; CFI = .92; RMSEA = .05; 90% IC RMSEA = .04-.06), así como una consistencia interna razonable (motivación controlada .75 y motivación autónoma .76). De este modo, se concluye que la versión portuguesa de BREQ-2 (con la exclusión del ítem 17), puede ser utilizada en la evaluación de la motivación controladora y autónoma (a través de la combinación de sus factores), en el contexto del ejercicio practicado en gimnasios.

Keywords

psychological assessmentconfirmatory factor analysisself-determination theoryexerciseevaluación psicológicaanálisis factorial confirmatorioteoría de la autodeterminaciónejercicio
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , November 2012 , pp. 1520 - 1528
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

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

Bentler, P. (2002). EQS 6 Structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software, Inc.Google Scholar
Bentler, P. (2007). On tests and índices for evaluating structural models. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 825–829. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, T. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: The Guiford Press.Google Scholar
Byrne, B. (1994). Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows. Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Byrne, B. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. Basic concepts, applications and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar
Byrne, B. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS. Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd Ed.) Mahawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, PublishersGoogle Scholar
Chou, C., & Bentler, P. (1995). Estimates and tests in structural equation modeling. In Hoyle, R. (Ed.), Structural equation modeling. Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 37–54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. NewYork, NY: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2000). The “What” and “Why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2008a). Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being across life's domains. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 49, 14–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0708-5591.49.1.14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2008b). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 49, 182–185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0012801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grolnick, W., & Ryan, R. (1987). Autonomy in children's learning: An experimental and individual difference investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 890–898. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.5.890CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hagger, M., & Chatzisarantis, N. (2008). Self-determination theory and the psychology of exercise. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1, 79–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17509840701827437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B.,Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th Ed.). UpperSaddle River, NJ: Pearson Educational, Inc.Google Scholar
Hoyle, R. (1995). The structural equation modeling approach. Basic concepts and fundamental issues. In Hoyle, R. (Ed.), Structural equation modeling approach. Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 1–15). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Hoyle, R., & Panter, A. (1995). Writing about structural equation medels. In Hoyle, R. (Ed.), Structural equation modeling. Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 158–176). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingledew, D., & Fergunson, E. (2007). Personality and riskier sexual behavior: Motivational mediators. Psychology and Health, 22, 291–315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14768320600941004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingledew, D., & Markland, D. (2008). The role of motives in exercise participation. Psychology and Health, 23, 807–828. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08870440701405704CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kahn, J. (2006). Factor analysis in counseling psychology. Research, trainning, and practice: Principles, advances and applications. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 684–718. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000006286347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kline, R. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Knafo, A., & Assor, A. (2007). Motivation for agreement with parental values: Desirable when autonomous, problematic when controlled. Motivation and Emotion, 31, 232–245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11031-007-9067-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lonsdale, C., Hodge, K., & Rose, E. (2008). The Behavioral Regulation in Sport Questionnaire (BRSQ): Instrument development and initial validity evidence. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 30, 323–355.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacCallum, R. (1995) Model specification. Procedures, strategies, and related issues. In Hoyle, R. (Ed.), Structural equation modeling. Concepts, issues, and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Mardia, K. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57, 519–530. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biomet/57.3.519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markland, D. (2007). The golden rule is that there are no golden rules: A commentary on Paul Barrett's recommendations for reporting model fir in structural equation modelling. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 851–858. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markland, D., & Ingledew, D. (2007). Exercise participation motives. In Hagger, M. & Chatzisarantis, N. (Eds.), Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in exercise and sport (pp. 23–34). Champaing, IL: Human Kinestics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markland, D., & Tobin, V. (2004). A modification to the behavioral regulation in exercise questionnaire to include an assessment of amotivation. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 26, 191–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markland, D., & Tobin, V. (2010). Need support and behavioral regulations for exercise among exercise referral scheme clients: The mediating role of psychological need satisfation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11, 91–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.07.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, H., Hau, K., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler's (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320–341. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mouratidis, M., Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Sideridis, G. (2008). The motivating role of positive feedback in sport and physical education: Evidence for a motivational model. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 30, 240–268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mullan, E., Markland, D., & Ingledew, D. (1997). A graded conceptualisation of self-determination in the regulation of exercise behavior: Development of a measure using confirmatory factor analytic procedures. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 745–752. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00107-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murcia, J., Gimeno, J., & Camacho, A. (2007). Measuring self-determination motivation in a physical fitness settings: Validation of the Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire-2 (BREQ-2) in a Spanish sample. The Journal of Sport Medicine and Physical Fitness, 47, 366–378.Google Scholar
Ntoumanis, N., & Standage, M. (2009). Morality in sport: A self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 365–380. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10413200903036040Google Scholar
Palmeira, A., & Teixeira, P. (2006, September). Adaptação preliminar do BREQ-2 para a língua portuguesa. [Preliminar adaptation of BREQ-2 to Portuguese language]. Paper presented at the V Congresso Luso-Espanhol de Psicologia do Desporto, Lisboa.Google Scholar
Palmeira, A., Teixeira, P., Silva, M., & Markland, D. (2007, September). Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the BREQ-2 - Portuguese version. Paper presented at the 12th European Congress of Sport Psychology, Halkidiki, Greece.Google Scholar
Pavey, L., & Sparks, P. (2008). Threats to autonomy: Motivational responses to risk information. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 852–865. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelletier, L., & Sarrazin, P. (2007). Measurement issues in self-determination theory and sport. In Hagger, M. & Chatzisarantis, N. (Eds.), Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in exercise and sport (pp. 143–152). Champaing, IL: Human Kinetics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ratelle, C., Guay, F., Vallerand, R., Larose, S., & Senécal, C. (2007). Autonomous, controlled, and amotivated types of academic motivation:Aperson-oriented analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 734–746. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.4.734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, R. (1995). Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes. Journal of Personality, 63, 397–427. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1995.tb00501.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryan, R., & Connell, J. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749–761. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.57.5.749CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000b). Self-determination theory and the dacilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.55.1.68CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectial perspective. In Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (Eds.), Handbook of delf-determination research (pp. 3–33). Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press.Google Scholar
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2007). Active human nature: Self-determination theory and the promotion and maintenance of sport, exercise, and health. In Hagger, M. & Chatzisarantis, N. (Eds.), Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in exercise and sport (pp. 1–19). Champaing, IL: Human Kinetics.Google Scholar
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In Eye, A. & Clogg, C. (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for development research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Standage, M., Gillison, F., & Treasure, D. (2007). Self-determination and motivation in physical education. In Hagger, M. & Chatzisarantis, N. (Eds.), Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in exercise and sport (pp. 71–85). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vallerand, R., & Losier, G. (1999). An integrative analysis of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in sport. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 11, 142–169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10413209908402956Google Scholar
Vallerand, R., & Ratelle, C. (2002). Intrinsic and exterinsic motivation: A hierarchical model. In Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 37–63). Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press.Google Scholar
Worthington, R., & Whittaker, T. (2006). Scale Development Research. A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 806–838. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000006288127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, M., Ma, W., & Deci, E. (2009) The importance of autonomy for rural Chinese children's motivation for learning. Learning & Individual Differences, 19, 492–498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2009.05.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar