SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2025
Behavioral regulation in sport questionnaire and sport motivation scale-II: a scale comparison.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study compared the psychometric properties of two primary instruments for assessing sport motivation based on Self-Determination Theory: the Sport Motivation Scale-II (SMS-II) and the Behavioral Regulation in Sport Questionnaire (BRSQ). Methods: A cross-sectional analysis evaluated the scales' internal consistency, factor structure, convergent and discriminant validity, and model fit, which required post-hoc modifications. Measurement invariance and adherence to the theoretical simplex pattern were also tested. Results: The BRSQ demonstrated generally acceptable reliability, while the SMS-II showed deficiencies in its introjected, external, and amotivation subscales. Both scales faced validity challenges in distinguishing adjacent motivational constructs. Although measurement invariance was supported, correlations deviated from the theoretical quasi-simplex pattern. Discussion: The BRSQ appears more robust, but neither scale is flawless. Researchers must select instruments aligned with their specific objectives and interpret scores cautiously due to these psychometric limitations. This underscores the need for refined tools to better capture the dynamic complexity of motivation in sports.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.