Development and validation of the physical effort scale (PES).

Autor: Cheval B; Department of Sport Sciences and Physical Education, École Normale Supérieure de Rennes, Bruz, France; VIPS(2) Laboratory, University of Rennes, France. Electronic address: boris.cheval@ens-rennes.fr., Maltagliati S; SENS Laboratory, Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France; Human and Evolutionary Biology Section, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Southern California, CA, USA. Electronic address: maltagli@usc.edu., Courvoisier DS; Department of Medicine, University of Geneva, Switzerland; Division of Rheumatology, Beau Séjour Hospital, Geneva University Hospital, Switzerland., Marcora S; Endurance Research Group, School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK; Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences (DIBINEM), University of Bologna, Italy., Boisgontier MP; School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Canada; Perley Health Centre of Excellence in Frailty-Informed Care, Ottawa, Canada. Electronic address: matthieu.boisgontier@uottawa.ca.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Psychology of sport and exercise [Psychol Sport Exerc] 2024 May; Vol. 72, pp. 102607. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Feb 14.
DOI: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2024.102607
Abstrakt: 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 (α = 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 (α = 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.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None to declare.
(Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: