Journal of Sports and Motor Development and Learning
Scientific Journal

Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of Adolescent Motor Competence Questionnaire (AMCQ)

Document Type : Research Paper I Open Access I Released under CC BY-NC 4.0 license

Authors

Mostafa Mohammadzadeh 1
Mahmoud Sheikh 2
Khaled Takizadeh 3
Fatemeh Keshvari 4

1 Ph.D. Of motor behavior, faculty of physical education and sport science, university of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor Of motor behavior, faculty of physical education and sport science, university of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

3 Ph.D. Candidate of motor behavior, faculty of physical education and sport science, university of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

4 Ph.D. Candidate of motor behavior, faculty of sport science and health, university of shahid Beheshti, Tehran, Tehran, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22059/jmlm.2022.323617.1574
Abstract
Background. An adolescent’s level of motor competence is important to assess as can impact on a range of daily functions and participation in physical activities. Formal assessments of motor competence can be time consuming and costly. One alternative is to use self-report questionnaires to screen for level of motor competence. Aim: This study examines the validity and reliability of the Persian version of the Adolescent Motor Competence Questionnaire (AMCQ) and differences between adolescent boys and girls. Method: Three evaluative stages were completed to translate the items into Persian, which included back translations by 4 native English and Persian speakers and 10 expert reviews. A total of 470 adolescents aged 12-18 years old (mean age 14.22 ± 1.64) from the Ray schools district completed the 26-item AMCQ. A subsample of 30 adolescents completed the AMCQ after 1 week for retest. Results: The content validity index (CVI=0.98) was strong. The results of exploratory factor analysis identified 4 factors and the results of the confirmatory factor analysis showed that items with a suitable factor load (0.95-0.65) on the four factors. The results revealed the AMCQ had high internal consistency (0.940), and acceptable test-retest reliability (r=0.885). When considering gender, boys had higher AMCQ scores compared to girls. The boy’s scores were related to the factors of ‘participating in physical activity and sport’ and ‘peer comparisons’. Conclusion. The results of this study show that the Persian version of AMCQ can be used as a valid tool to assess Iranian adolescence motor competence.

Keywords

adolescence
motor competence
psychometric
questionnaire
reliability
validity
  1. Stodden DF, Goodway JD, Langendorfer SJ, Roberton MA, Rudisill ME, Garcia C, et al. A developmental perspective on the role of motor skill competence in physical activity: An emergent relationship. Quest. 2008;60(2):290-306.
  2. Whitehead M. Definition of physical literacy: Developments and issues. Physical Literacy across the World: Routledge; 2019. p. 8-18.
  3. Mandigo J, Francis N, Lodewyk K. Physical literacy concept paper. Canadian Sport for Life. 2007.
  4. Lopes VP, Barnett LM, Saraiva L, Gonçalves C, Bowe SJ, Abbott G, et al. Validity and reliability of a pictorial instrument for assessing perceived motor competence in Portuguese children. Child: Care, Health and Development. 2016;42(5):666-74.
  5. Babic MJ, Morgan PJ, Plotnikoff RC, Lonsdale C, White RL, Lubans DR. Physical activity and physical self-concept in youth: systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports medicine. 2014;44(11):1589-601.
  6. Rodrigues LP, Luz C, Lima R, Silva B, Lopes VP. Motor Competence Assessment (MCA): portuguese normative Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology. 2019;41:S19-S20.
  7. Skinner RA, Piek JP. Psychosocial implications of poor motor coordination in children and adolescents. Human movement science. 2001;20(1-2):73-94.
  8. Cantell M, Crawford SG, Tish Doyle-Baker PK. Physical fitness and health indices in children, adolescents and adults with high or low motor competence. Hum Mov Sci. 2008;27(2):344-62.
  9. Hands B, Larkin D, Parker H, Straker L, Perry M. The relationship among physical activity, motor competence and health‐related fitness in 14‐year‐old adolescents. Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports. 2009;19(5):655-63.
  10. Hill EL, Brown D, Sorgardt KS. A preliminary investigation of quality of life satisfaction reports in emerging adults with and without developmental coordination disorder. Journal of Adult Development. 2011;18(3):130-4.
  11. Payne S, Ward G, Turner A, Taylor MC, Bark C. The social impact of living with developmental coordination disorder as a 13-year-old. British journal of occupational therapy. 2013;76(8):362-9.
  12. Myer GD, Faigenbaum AD, Ford KR, Best TM, Bergeron MF, Hewett TE. When to initiate integrative neuromuscular training to reduce sports-related injuries in youth? Current sports medicine reports. 2011;10(3):155-166.
  13. Luz C, Cordovil R, Almeida G, Rodrigues L. Link between motor competence and health related fitness in children and adolescents. Sports. 2017;5(2):41-9.
  14. Hands B, Parker H, Rose E, Larkin D. Gender and motor competence affects perceived likelihood and importance of physical activity outcomes among 14 year olds. Child: care, health and development. 2016;42(2):246-52.
  15. Timler A, McIntyre F, Hands B. Adolescents' self-reported motor assessments may be more realistic than those of their parents. British Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2018;81(4):227-33.
  16. Cairney J, Rigoli D, Piek J. Developmental coordination disorder and internalizing problems in children: the environmental stress hypothesis elaborated. Developmental Review. 2013;33(3):224-38.
  17. Campos C, Queiroz D, Silva J, Feitoza A, Cattuzzo M. Relationship between organized physical activity and motor competence in teenagers. Am J Sport Sci Med. 2017;5:82-5.
  18. Taymoori P, Berry TR. Longitudinal changes in beliefs by stage of physical activity adoption in Iranian girls. Journal of School Health. 2015;85(5):299-308.
  19. Ziaee V, Kelishadi R, Ardalan G, Gheiratmand R, Majdzadeh S, Monazzam M. Physical activity in Iranian students CASPIAN Study. Iranian Journal of Pediatrics. 2006;16(2):157- (in persian)
  20. Kirby A, Edwards L, Sugden D. Emerging adulthood and developmental co-ordination disorder. Journal of adult development. 2011;18(3):107-13.
  21. McCarron L. McCarron assessment of neuromuscular development: fine and gross motor abilities (revised). Texas: McCarron-Dial Systems. Inc; 1997.
  22. Brown T, Lalor A. The movement assessment battery for children—second edition (MABC-2): a review and critique. Physical & occupational therapy in pediatrics. 2009;29(1):86-103.
  23. Bruininks RH, Bruininks BD. BOT2: Bruininks-oseretsky test of motor proficiency: AGS Publishing; 2005.
  24. Dreiskaemper D, Utesch T, Tietjens M. The Perceived Motor Competence Questionnaire in Childhood (PMC-C). Journal of Motor Learning and Development. 2018;6(2):264-80.
  25. Clark CJ. Development and psychometric properties of a screening tool for assessing developmental coordination disorder in adults. International Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. 2013;1(145-153.
  26. Kirby A, Edwards L, Sugden D, Rosenblum S. The development and standardization of the Adult Developmental Co-ordination Disorders/Dyspraxia Checklist (ADC). Research in Developmental Disabilities. 2010;31(1):131-9.
  27. Saban MT, Ornoy A, Grotto I, Parush S. Adolescents and adults coordination questionnaire: Development and psychometric properties. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2012;66(4):406-13.
  28. Wilson BN, Crawford SG, Green D, Roberts G, Aylott A, Kaplan BJ. Psychometric properties of the revised developmental coordination disorder questionnaire. Physical & occupational therapy in pediatrics. 2009;29(2):182-202.
  29. Timler A, McIntyre F, Cantell M, Crawford S, Hands B. Development and evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Adolescent Motor Competence Questionnaire (AMCQ) for Adolescents. Research in developmental disabilities. 2016;59:127-37.
  30. Timler A, McIntyre F, Hands B. Factors contributing to Australian adolescents’ self-report of their motor skill competence. Journal of Motor Learning and Development. 2018;6(2):281- 300.
  31. Asefi AA, Amoozadeh Z. The Codification of Model of Significant Others Roles and Adolescence’s Participation in Physical Activity and Sport. Research on ٍEducational Sport. 2017;5(13):17-38. (in persian)
  32. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25(24):3186-91.
  33. Seifoori Z, Vahidfar S. Emotionality and Formality in Postgraduate ELT Students’ Use of Diction in Farsi and English Writing. The Journal Of English Language Pedagogy And Practice. 2014;7(Number 14):172 - 90. (in persian)
  34. Comrey A, Lee H. A first course in Factor Analysis, Hillsdale: NJ: Eribaum. DOI; 1992.
  35. MacCallum RC, Widaman KF, Zhang S, Hong S. Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological methods. 1999;4(1):84.
  36. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5®): American Psychiatric Pub; 2013.
  37. Rubio DM, Berg-Weger M, Tebb SS, Lee ES, Rauch S. Objectifying content validity: Conducting a content validity study in social work research. Social work research. 2003;27(2):94-104.
  38. Polit DF. Getting serious about test–retest reliability: a critique of retest research and some recommendations. Quality of Life Research. 2014;23(6):1713-20.
  39. Bentler PM, Bonett Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological bulletin. 1980;88(3):588.
  40. Luszczynska A, Gibbons FX, Piko BF, Tekozel M. Self-regulatory cognitions, social comparison, and perceived peers’ behaviors as predictors of nutrition and physical activity: A comparison among adolescents in Hungary, Poland, Turkey, and USA. Psychology & Health. 2004;19(5):577-93.
  41. Slater A, Tiggemann M. Gender differences in adolescent sport participation, teasing, self-objectification and body image concerns. Journal of Adolescence. 2011;34(3):455-63.
Journal of Sports and Motor Development and Learning
Volume 14, Issue 1
Spring 2022
Pages 53-72

  • Receive Date 17 July 2021
  • Revise Date 28 November 2021
  • Accept Date 21 December 2021

Home

Publication Ethics

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Contact Us