Translation, cultural adaptation, and validation of the Spanish version of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-3 (MIQ-3)

Trapero-Asenjo, Sara; Gallego‐Izquierdo, Tomás; Pecos‐Martín, Daniel; Núñez-Nagy, Susana

doi:10.1016/j.msksp.2020.102313

Cited by 9 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 19.9 28♂ n.d.s. Trapero-Asenjo et al 2021 [ 82 ] ES S Students 62 NR NR Test-retest External ICC=0.81 Internal ICC=0.88 Kinaesthetic ICC=0.82 Adequate + Sample size adequate but test conditions for retest not mentioned. n.d.s.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… n.d.s. Trapero-Asenjo et al 2021 [ 82 ] ES S Students 140 21.5 47♀, 93♂ Internal consistency External α =0.84 Internal α =0.85 Kinaesthetic α =0.86 Very good ? Very good sample size, Cronbach's alpha for each scale calculated.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 19.9 57♂ n.d.s. Trapero-Asenjo et al 2021 [ 82 ] ES S Students 140 21.5 47♀, 93♂ Construct validity- structural validity CFA and the three-factor model showed good fit: RMSEA=0.07, NFI=0.90, RFI=0.91, CFI=0.90. The absolute fit measures with χ 2 of p =0.001 indicating an inadequate model.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In total, 30 out of the 33 motor imagery articles reported structural, criterion or construct validity. Only ten studies [ 6 , 43 , 73 , 74 , 77 – 80 , 83 , 89 ] were rated as very good or adequate and 12 studies [ 27 , 67 – 69 , 75 , 76 , 82 , 84 , 85 , 88 , 92 , 93 ] were rated as inadequate regarding their methodological quality. The ‘risk of bias assessment/rating’ could not be applied to the study by Hall et al [ 72 ] due to insufficient reporting on statistical methods that were performed.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In total, 29 out of the 33 motor imagery articles reported development, internal consistency or test-retest reliability. Nine studies [ 7 , 31 , 73 , 79 – 82 , 85 , 90 ] were rated as very good or adequate regarding their methodological quality. A total of 15 studies [ 27 , 43 , 67 , 71 , 72 , 74 – 76 , 78 , 83 , 84 , 86 – 89 ] showed doubtful methodological quality and five studies [ 66 , 68 – 70 , 77 ] were rated as inadequate.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Imagery ability assessments: a cross-disciplinary systematic review and quality evaluation of psychometric properties

Suica

Behrendt

Gäumann

et al. 2022

BMC Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Over the last two centuries, researchers developed several assessments to evaluate the multidimensional construct of imagery. However, no comprehensive systematic review (SR) exists for imagery ability evaluation methods and an in-depth quality evaluation of their psychometric properties. Methods We performed a comprehensive systematic search in six databases in the disciplines of sport, psychology, medicine, education: SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and ERIC. Two reviewers independently identified and screened articles for selection. COSMIN checklist was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the studies. All included assessments were evaluated for quality using criteria for good measurement properties. The evidence synthesis was summarised by using the GRADE approach. Results In total, 121 articles reporting 155 studies and describing 65 assessments were included. We categorised assessments based on their construct on: (1) motor imagery (n = 15), (2) mental imagery (n = 48) and (3) mental chronometry (n = 2). Methodological quality of studies was mainly doubtful or inadequate. The psychometric properties of most assessments were insufficient or indeterminate. The best rated assessments with sufficient psychometric properties were MIQ, MIQ-R, MIQ-3, and VMIQ-2 for evaluation of motor imagery ability. Regarding mental imagery evaluation, only SIAQ and VVIQ showed sufficient psychometric properties. Conclusion Various assessments exist to evaluate an individual’s imagery ability within different dimensions or modalities of imagery in different disciplines. However, the psychometric properties of most assessments are insufficient or indeterminate. Several assessments should be revised and further validated. Moreover, most studies were only evaluated with students. Further cross-disciplinary validation studies are needed including older populations with a larger age range. Our findings allow clinicians, coaches, teachers, and researchers to select a suitable imagery ability assessment for their setting and goals based on information about the focus and quality of the assessments. Systematic reviews register PROSPERO CRD42017077004.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Imagery ability assessments: a cross-disciplinary systematic review and quality evaluation of psychometric properties

Suica

Behrendt

Gäumann

et al. 2022

BMC Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Convergent validity and sex invariant factor structure of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-3 - Second version (MIQ-3S): Healthy, young adult reference data

Monsma¹,

Gregg²,

Seiler³

et al. 2022

Musculoskeletal Science and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development and Validation of the Combined Action Observation and Motor Imagery Ability Questionnaire

Scott,

Esselaar,

Dagnall

et al. 2024

Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Combined use of action observation and motor imagery (AOMI) is an increasingly popular motor-simulation intervention, which involves observing movements on video while simultaneously imagining the feeling of movement execution. Measuring and reporting participant imagery-ability characteristics are essential in motor-simulation research, but no measure of AOMI ability currently exists. Accordingly, the AOMI Ability Questionnaire (AOMI-AQ) was developed to address this gap in the literature. In Study 1, two hundred eleven participants completed the AOMI-AQ and the kinesthetic imagery subscales of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-3 and Vividness of Motor Imagery Questionnaire-2. Following exploratory factor analysis, an 8-item AOMI-AQ was found to correlate positively with existing motor-imagery measures. In Study 2, one hundred seventy-four participants completed the AOMI-AQ for a second time after a period of 7–10 days. Results indicate a good test–retest reliability for the AOMI-AQ. The new AOMI-AQ measure provides a valid and reliable tool for researchers and practitioners wishing to assess AOMI ability.

show abstract

Translation, cultural adaptation, and validation of the Spanish version of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-3 (MIQ-3)

Cited by 9 publications

References 27 publications

Imagery ability assessments: a cross-disciplinary systematic review and quality evaluation of psychometric properties

Imagery ability assessments: a cross-disciplinary systematic review and quality evaluation of psychometric properties

Convergent validity and sex invariant factor structure of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-3 - Second version (MIQ-3S): Healthy, young adult reference data

Development and Validation of the Combined Action Observation and Motor Imagery Ability Questionnaire

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About