Objectives: Previous literature has primarily viewed physical effort as an aversive experience. However, recent research suggests that effort can also be valued positively. These differences in approach and avoidance tendencies toward physical effort may play a key role in the self-regulation of physical activity behaviors. The aim of this study was to develop a scale that measures these tendencies and contributes to a better understanding of physical effort and how it affects behavior. Methods: The Physical Effort Scale (PES) was developed in Study 1 based on expert evaluations (n = 9) and cognitive interviews (n = 10). In Study 2 (n = 680, 69% female), content validity and dimensional structure were examined using principal component analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. Item reduction was conducted using item response theory. Preliminary construct validity was explored using regression. Study 3 (n = 297, 71% female) was used to validate dimensional structure, internal consistency, and construct validity, and to assess test-retest reliability. Results: In Study 1, 44 items were rated for content validity, of which 18 were selected and refined based on cognitive interviews. Analyses from Study 2 allowed reducing the scale to 8 items with a two-dimension structure: tendency to approach (n = 4) and to avoid physical effort (n = 4). The two subscales showed high internal consistency (alpha = 0.897 for the approach dimension and 0.913 for the avoidance dimension) and explained usual levels of physical activity, providing preliminary evidence of construct validity. Study 3 confirmed the two-dimension structure with high internal consistency (alpha = 0.907 and 0.916 for the approach and avoidance dimension, respectively) and revealed acceptable test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation >0.66). Patterns of associations with other constructs showed expected relationships, confirming the concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity of the scale. Conclusions: The PES is a valid and reliable measure of individual differences in the valuation of physical effort. This scale can assess the propensity to engage in physically demanding tasks in non-clinical populations. The PES and its manual are available in the Supplementary Material.
Cheval B., Maltagliati S., Courvoisier D.S., Marcora S., Boisgontier M.P. (2024). Development and validation of the physical effort scale (PES). PSYCHOLOGY OF SPORT AND EXERCISE, 72, 1-12 [10.1016/j.psychsport.2024.102607].
Development and validation of the physical effort scale (PES)
Marcora S.;
2024
Abstract
Objectives: Previous literature has primarily viewed physical effort as an aversive experience. However, recent research suggests that effort can also be valued positively. These differences in approach and avoidance tendencies toward physical effort may play a key role in the self-regulation of physical activity behaviors. The aim of this study was to develop a scale that measures these tendencies and contributes to a better understanding of physical effort and how it affects behavior. Methods: The Physical Effort Scale (PES) was developed in Study 1 based on expert evaluations (n = 9) and cognitive interviews (n = 10). In Study 2 (n = 680, 69% female), content validity and dimensional structure were examined using principal component analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. Item reduction was conducted using item response theory. Preliminary construct validity was explored using regression. Study 3 (n = 297, 71% female) was used to validate dimensional structure, internal consistency, and construct validity, and to assess test-retest reliability. Results: In Study 1, 44 items were rated for content validity, of which 18 were selected and refined based on cognitive interviews. Analyses from Study 2 allowed reducing the scale to 8 items with a two-dimension structure: tendency to approach (n = 4) and to avoid physical effort (n = 4). The two subscales showed high internal consistency (alpha = 0.897 for the approach dimension and 0.913 for the avoidance dimension) and explained usual levels of physical activity, providing preliminary evidence of construct validity. Study 3 confirmed the two-dimension structure with high internal consistency (alpha = 0.907 and 0.916 for the approach and avoidance dimension, respectively) and revealed acceptable test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation >0.66). Patterns of associations with other constructs showed expected relationships, confirming the concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity of the scale. Conclusions: The PES is a valid and reliable measure of individual differences in the valuation of physical effort. This scale can assess the propensity to engage in physically demanding tasks in non-clinical populations. The PES and its manual are available in the Supplementary Material.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
PES paper_accepted manuscript.pdf
embargo fino al 14/02/2025
Descrizione: Accepted manuscript + file supplementare
Tipo:
Postprint
Licenza:
Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate (CCBYNCND)
Dimensione
1.38 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.38 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Contatta l'autore |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.