2016
DOI: 10.1111/josh.12392
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reliability and Validity of the Physical Education Activities Scale

Abstract: Findings provide psychometric support for using the PEAS for examining adolescent's psychosocial and environmental perceptions to participating in PE activities.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 84 publications
(84 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) based on principal components for the dimensions on the formal samples showed that four factors were extracted ( table 1 ). According to previous studies, 59–61 factor loading values at 0.3 or greater were considered acceptable, whereas those greater than 0.55 were considered good. table 1 showed that all the loading values of the items to the corresponding dimensions were greater than 0.55, so the construct validity of the questionnaire was good.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) based on principal components for the dimensions on the formal samples showed that four factors were extracted ( table 1 ). According to previous studies, 59–61 factor loading values at 0.3 or greater were considered acceptable, whereas those greater than 0.55 were considered good. table 1 showed that all the loading values of the items to the corresponding dimensions were greater than 0.55, so the construct validity of the questionnaire was good.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…60 The KMOs of the 3 scales were 0.807, 0.916, and 0.745. According to previous studies, 61,62 factor loading values at 0.3 or greater can be considered acceptable, and factor loading greater than 0.55 can be considered good. Table 1 shows that all the loading values of the items corresponding to the dimensions are greater than 0.55, and the total variances explained by each of the three scales are 56.38%, 66.12%, and 62.91%, respectively, indicating an acceptable and good construct validity.…”
Section: Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Respectively, the KMOs of the two dimensions were 0.781 and 0.889, the values of Bartlett’s sphericity test were all less than 0.001. To assess the factor loading values, previous studies [ 35 , 36 ] have suggested that values at or above 0.3 can be deemed acceptable, while values exceeding 0.55 can be deemed favorable. The loading values of all items corresponding to the dimensions in Table 1 were found to be greater than 0.55.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%