期刊文献+

体育倾向性问卷的设计与评价 被引量:2

Physical commitment's construct and scale development
下载PDF
导出
摘要 通过访谈、开放式问卷等方法,构建了我国居民体育倾向性的理论维度,并据此编制了体育倾向性量表。对量表进行探索性因素分析和验证性因素分析后表明:体育倾向性主要由情感体验、体育态度、主观规范、主观控制感4个因素构成。 Physical commitment is one of the main contexts of subjective well being. On the basis of foreign scales of physical commitment, this paper constructed the theoretical dimension of Chinese physical commitment by in -depth interviews, open questionnaires, and previous literatures, then developed the scale of physical commitment. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis found that physical commitment was mainly composed of four factors: affection experience, physical attitude, subjective norm and perceived control.
出处 《湖北师范学院学报(自然科学版)》 2008年第1期30-33,共4页 Journal of Hubei Normal University(Natural Science)
关键词 体育倾向性 因素分析 量表 physical commitment factor analysis scale
  • 相关文献

参考文献7

  • 1Alexandris K,Grouios G,Tsorbatzoudis H,et al.Relationship between perceived constraints and commitment to recreational sport participation of university students in Greece[J].International Journal of Sport Management,2001,(2):282-297.
  • 2Scanlan T K.An introduction to the Sport Commitment Model[J].Journal of Sport Exercise Psychology,1993,15:1-15.
  • 3Carpenter P J.A test of the Sport Commitment Model using structural equation modeling[J].Journal of Sport Exercise Psychology,1993,15:119-133.
  • 4Scanlan T K.The Sport Commitment Model:Measurement development for the youth sport domain[J].Journal Sport of Exercise Psychology,1993,15:16-38.
  • 5Konstantinos A.Testing the Sport Commitment Model in the Context of Exercise and Fitness Participation[J].Journal of Sport Behavior,2001,25:217-230.
  • 6侯杰泰 成子娟 钟财文.结构方程式拟合优概念及常用指数之比较.教育研究学报,1996,11:73-81.
  • 7温忠麟,侯杰泰,马什赫伯特.结构方程模型检验:拟合指数与卡方准则[J].心理学报,2004,36(2):186-194. 被引量:1290

二级参考文献30

  • 1[1]Tucker L R, Lewis C. The reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 1973, 38: 1~10
  • 2[2]Steiger J H, Lind J M. Statistically-based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the Psychometrika Society Meeting, IowaCity, May, 1980
  • 3[3]Bentler P M, Bonett D G. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 1980, 88: 588~ 606
  • 4[4]Bentler P M. Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin,1990, 107: 238~ 246
  • 5[5]McDonald R P, Marsh H W. Choosing a multivariate model: Noncentrality and goodness-of-fit. Psychological Bulletin, 1990,107: 247~ 255
  • 6[6]Marsh H W, Balla J R, Hau K T. An evaluation of incremental fit indices: A clarification of mathematical and empirical processes. In: Marcoulides G A, Schumacker R E eds. Advanced structural equation modeling techniques. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1996. 315~ 353
  • 7[7]Browne M W, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen K A, Long J S eds. Testing Structural Equation Models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1993. 136~ 162
  • 8[8]Joreskog K G, Srbom D. LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago: Scientific Software International, 1993
  • 9[9]Hu L, Bentler P M. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 1998, 3: 424~ 453
  • 10[10]Hu L, Bentler P M. Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 1999, 6: 1~ 55

共引文献1289

同被引文献5

引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部