El objetivo de este estudio fue examinar las propiedades psicométricas (estructura factorial, fiabilidad, validez de constructo) de una versión en español hablado en México de la Escala de Motivación en el Deporte revisada (SMS-II) compuesta por 18 ítems que miden seis factores de regulación conductual planteados por la teoría de la autodeterminación, y probar un modelo que permitiese evaluar la motivación autónoma y la motivación controlada. Participaron 279 deportistas de alto rendimiento con una edad promedio de 23.15 años (DT = 5.58), quienes respondieron a una versión en español hablado en México de la SMS-II. Los resultados apoyaron el modelo de seis factores de primer orden (motivación intrínseca, regulación integrada, regulación identificada, regulación introyectada, regulación externa, y desmotivación) tras la eliminación de un ítem; y los datos de consistencia interna superaron o estuvieron al límite de los criterios de uso en cinco factores. Cuando las regulaciones motivacionales se combinaron para conformar un modelo trifactorial, dos de sus factores de segundo orden (motivación autónoma y motivación controlada) más un factor de primer orden (desmotivación), se soportó dicho modelo, y la consistencia interna de los factores fue adecuada. En conclusión se ofrece validez factorial y de constructo  de esta versión en español hablado en México de la Escala de Motivación en el Deporte revisada con la exclusión un ítem, y puede utilizarse para la medición de la motivación controlada y autónoma en el deporte de alto rendimiento, aunque se requiere de mayor estudio para mejorar el instrumento.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to analyze the psychometric properties (factorial structure, reliability, construct validity) of a Mexican Spanish version of the revised Sport Motivation Scale (SMS-II), which is composed of 18 items that measure six factors of behavioral regulation. Such factors were suggested by the Self-determination Theory in order to prove a model that allows the assessment of Autonomous and Controlled Motivation. The study involved 279 high performance athletes with an average age of 23.15 years old (SD = 5.58), who answered the Mexican Spanish Version of the SMS-II. After eliminating one of the items, the results supported the six major factor model (intrinsic motivation, integrated regulation, identified regulation, introjected regulation, external regulation and amotivation); and the internal consistent data exceeded or were under the limit of the usage criteria in five of the factors. After the motivational regulations were combined in order to form a three-factor model, two of the minor factors (autonomous and controlled motivation) plus one major factor (amotivation), such model was supported and the internal consistency of the factors was appropriate. In conclusion, the Mexican Spanish version of the SMS-II offers factorial structure and construct validity, excluding one of the items. Thus, it can be used for assessing autonomous and controlled motivation in elite athletes, even though further research shall be conducted to improve this instrument.

http://dx.doi.org/10.5232/ricyde2016.04402

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Referencias/references

Assor, A.; Vansteenkiste, M., & Kaplan, A. (2009). Identified versus introjected approach and introjected avoidance motivations in school and in sports: The limited benefits of self-worth strivings. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 482-497.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014236

Balaguer, I.; Castillo, I., y Duda, J. L. (2007). Propiedades psicométricas de la Escala de Motivación Deportiva en deportistas españoles. Revista Mexicana de Psicología, 24, 197-207.

Balluerka, N.; Gorostiaga, A.; Alonso-Arbiol, I., y Haranburu, M. (2007). La adaptación de instrumentos de medida de unas culturas a otras: Una perspectiva práctica. Psicothema, 19, 124-133.

Beddoes, Z. E. (2014). Effects of teacher-to-student relatedness on adolescent male motivation in weight-training classes. Tesis de maestría. Brigham Young University.

Bentler, P. M. (2007). On tests and indices for evaluating structural models. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 825-829.

Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. Nueva York: John Wiley and Sons.

Brière, N. M.; Vallerand, R. J.; Blais, M. R., & Pelletier, L. G. (1995). Développement et validation d’une mesure de motivation intrinsèque, extrinsèque et d’amotivation en context sportif: I’Echelle de Motivation dans les Sports (EMS). International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, 465-489.

Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464-504.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834

Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 235-255.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5

Chou, C-P., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Estimates and tests in structural equation modeling. En R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 37-55). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Chou, C-P.; Bentler, P. M., & Satorra, A. (1991). Scaled test statistics and robust standard errors for non-normal data in covariance structure analysis: A Monte Carlo study. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 44, 347-357.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1991.tb00966.x

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. New York: Plenum Press.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1024-1037.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1024

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. En R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation: Vol. 38, Perspectives on motivation (pp. 237-288). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology, 49, 182-185.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0012801

Fortier, M. S.; Vallerand, R. J.; Brière, N. M., & Provencher, P. J. (1995). Competitive and recreational sport structures and gender: A test of their relationship with sport motivation. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, 24-39.

Gené, P. S., y Latinjak, A. T. (2014). Relación entre necesidades básicas y autodeterminación en deportistas de élite. Cuadernos de Psicología del Deporte, 14, 49-56.

Gillet, N., & Rosnet, E. (2008). Basic need satisfaction and motivation in sport. The Online Journal of Sport Psychology, 10(3). Recuperado de
http://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol10Iss3/BasicNeed.htm

Hair, J.; Black, B.; Babin, B.; Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Hambleton, R. K. (1996). Adaptación de tests para su uso en diferentes idiomas y culturas: Fuentes de error, posibles soluciones y directrices prácticas. En J. Muñiz (Ed.), Psicometría (pp. 207-238). Madrid: Universitas.

Hodge, K.; Allen, J. B., & Smellie, L. (2008). Motivation in Masters sport: Achievement and social goals. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 9, 157-176.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2007.03.002

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2006). LISREL 8.80. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.

Judge, T. A.; Bono, J. E.; Erez, A., & Locke, E. A. (2005). Core self-evaluations and job and life satisfaction: the role of self-concordance and goal attainment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 257-268.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.2.257

Kaliush, P. R. (2014). Disordered eating in female collegiate athletes: Investigating the relationships among coaching and parenting styles, psychological needs, and self-determined motivation. Honors Theses. Dickinson College.

Kidder, L., & Judd, C. (1986). Research methods in social science. New York: CBS College Publishing.

Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford.

Lonsdale, C.; Hodge, K., & Rose, E. A. (2008). The Behavioral Regulation in Sport Questionnaire (BRSQ): Instrument development and initial validity evidence. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 30, 323-355.

Lonsdale, C.; Hodge, K.; Hargreaves, E. A., & Ng, J. Y. Y. (2014). Comparing sport motivation scales: A response to Pelletier et al. Psychology of Sport and Excercise, 15, 446-452.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.03.006

Mallett, C. J., & Hanrahan, S. J. (2004). Elite athletes: why does the ‘fire’burn so brightly?. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 5, 183-200.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1469-0292(02)00043-2

Mallett, C.; Kawabata, M.; Newcombe, P.; Otero-Forero, A., & Jackson, S. (2007). Sport Motivation Scale-6 (SMS-6): A revised six-factor Sport Motivation Scale. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8, 600-614.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2006.12.005

Markland, D., & Tobin, V. (2004). A modification to the Behavioural Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire to include an assessment of amotivation. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 26, 191-196.

Martens, M. P., & Webber, S. N. (2002). Psychometric properties of the Sport Motivation Scale: An evaluation with college varsity athletes from the US. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 24, 254-270.

Millsap, R. E., & Kwok, O. (2004). Evaluating the impact of partial factorial invariance on selection in two populations. Psychological Methods, 9, 93–115.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.1.93

Mullan, E.; Markland, D., & Ingledew, D. K. (1997). A graded conceptualisation of self-determination in the regulation of exercise behaviour: development of a meassure using confirmatory factor analytic procedures. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 745-752.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00107-4

Muñiz, J.; Elosua, P., y Hambleton, R. K. (2013). Directrices para la traducción y adaptación de los tests: Segunda edición. Psicothema, 25, 151-157.
http://dx.doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2013.24

Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. Nueva York: McGraw-Hill.

Pelletier, L. G., & Sarrazin, P. (2007). Measurement issues in self-determination theory and sport. En M. S. Hagger y N. L. D. Chatzisarantis (Eds.), Intrinsic motivation in exercise and sport (pp. 143-152). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Pelletier, L. G.; Fortier, M. S.; Vallerand, R. J.; Tuson, K. M.; Brière, N. M., & Blais, M. R. (1995). Toward a new measure of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation and amotivation in ports: The Sport Motivation Scale (SMS). Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 17, 35-53.

Pelletier, L. G.; Rocchi, M. A.; Vallerand, R. J.; Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2013). Validation of the revised Sport Motivation Scale (SMS-II). Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14, 329-341.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.12.002

Pope, J. P., & Wilson, P. M. (2012). Understanding motivational processes in university rugby players: A preliminary test of the Hierarchical Model of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation at the contextual level. International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, 7, 89-108.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1260/1747-9541.7.1.89

Neuliep, J. W., & Crandall, R. (1993). Reviewer bias against replication research. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 8, 21-29.

Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749-761.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.749

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). An overview of self-determination theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. En E. L. Deci y R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3-33). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2007). Active human nature: Self-determination theory and the promotion and maintenance of sport, exercise, and health. En M. S. Hagger y N. L. D. Chatzisarantis (Eds.), Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in exercise and sport (pp. 1-19). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Standage, M.; Duda, J. L., & Ntoumanis, N. (2003). A model of contextual motivation in physical education: Using constructs from self-determination and achievement goal theories to predict physical activity intentions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 97–110.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.97

Vallerand, R. J., & Losier, G. F. (1999). An integrative analysis of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in sport. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 11, 142-169.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10413209908402956

Vallerand, R. J., & Ratelle, C. F. (2002). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: A hierarchical model. En E. L. Deci y R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of Self-determination Research (pp. 37-64). UK: University Rochester Press.

Viladrich, C.; Torregrosa, M., y Cruz, J. (2011). Calidad psicométrica de la adaptación española del Cuestionario de Regulación Conductual en el Deporte. Psicothema, 23, 786-794.

Widaman, K. F. (1985). Hierarchically nested covariance structure models for multitrait-multimethod data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 1–26.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014662168500900101