The Basic Needs Satisfaction in Sport Scale (BNSSS): Instrument development and initial validity evidence

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2010.10.006Get rights and content

Abstract

Objectives

Employing a self-determination theory framework, the purpose of this project was to develop a measure of basic needs satisfaction in sport (autonomy, competence, and relatedness).

Method

Two studies were conducted to examine various aspects of reliability and validity. Hong Kong athletes (n = 273; mean age = 20.75 yrs) participated in Study 1. Reliability and factorial validity was examined using alpha coefficients and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), respectively. New Zealand athletes (n = 371; mean age = 18.97 yrs) participated in Study 2. Factorial validity was revisited; nomological validity was assessed using correlations between theoretically related constructs (motivation, flow, athlete burnout).

Results

In Study 1, good fit to the hypothesized three-factor model was found (CFI = .98, RMSEA = .06). Alpha coefficients ranged from .80 to .87. In Study 2, construct coverage of BNSSS was reviewed, Experts suggested that the autonomy subscale did not adequately cover the internal perceived locus of causality (IPLOC) and volition aspects of autonomy; thus we added six new items intended to tap these constructs. Model fit of the hypothesized five-factor model was examined using CFA (CFI = .97, RMSEA = .06). Alpha coefficients were: Competence = .77, Autonomy-Choice = .82, Autonomy-IPLOC = .76, Autonomy-Volition = .61, Relatedness = .77. Significant correlations (p < .05) with scores representing theoretically related constructs were in the hypothesized direction.

Conclusion

Initial supportive evidence of reliability and construct validity of BNSSS scores was found. However, scale development is an ongoing process and future research is needed to further examine the validity of the BNSSS scores.

Highlights

► A sport-specific measure of basic psychological needs satisfaction was created. ► Data fit a 5 factor model – competence, relatedness, and 3 aspects of autonomy. ► Correlations with theoretically related constructs were in the hypothesized direction.

Section snippets

Measuring basic needs satisfaction in sport

In spite of the growing evidence regarding the importance of basic needs satisfaction in competitive sport, little emphasis has been paid to creating a measure of basic needs satisfaction specifically for use in the sport context. In previous sport studies, researchers have measured perceived basic needs satisfaction using scales that were adapted from other domains such as work (e.g., Gagné et al., 2003) and education (e.g., Kowal & Fortier, 2000). These adaptations may be problematic because

Study 1

Based on the definitions of the basic needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness proposed by Ryan and Deci (2002) and informal interviews with six athletes, 32 items (10 for competence, 10 for autonomy, and 12 for relatedness) were created in English and designed to reflect athletes’ cognitions and affect associated with their sport participation (see Table A in supplementary document). The content relevance of these items was assessed using procedures recommended by Dunn, Bouffard, and

Study 2

Construct coverage refers to the extent to which a set of items represent an entire construct. Consequently, it was necessary to wait until the content review and the CFAs in Study 1 had been completed and the set of items designed to measure each of the three constructs had been established. The 15 items (five for each basic need) retained from Study 1 were grouped into the constructs they were intended to measure. The ten reviewers who took part in the content-coverage review in Study 1 were

Study 3

The purpose of Study 3 was to examine the test–retest reliability of the five-factor BNSSS. Participants were 63 athletes (25 females, 38 males; mean age = 21.22 years, SD = 1.96 years) who were also undergraduate students at a university in Hong Kong. Participants were asked to complete a Chinese version of the BNSSS on two occasions seven days apart. A seven-day time frame between the administrations was used in order to minimize changes in basic needs satisfaction. Therefore, any inconsistencies

General discussion

The purpose of this series of studies was to create items and test the reliability and validity of scores derived from a basic needs satisfaction scale developed specifically for use in the sport domain. Grounded in self-determination theory (Ryan and Deci, 2002, Ryan and Deci, 2007), the 20-item five-factor BNSSS was created to measure satisfaction of the basic psychological needs of competence (five items), autonomy (ten items separated into three different aspects), and relatedness (five

References (36)

  • M. Csikszentmihalyi

    Flow: The psychology of optimal experience

    (1990)
  • E.L. Deci et al.

    The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior

    Psychological Inquiry

    (2000)
  • J.G.H. Dunn et al.

    Assessing item content-relevance in sport psychology scale-construction research: issues and recommendations

    Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science

    (1999)
  • E. Ferrer-Caja et al.

    Predictors of intrinsic motivation among adolescent students in physical education

    Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport

    (2000)
  • M. Gagné et al.

    Autonomy support and need satisfaction in the motivation and well-being of gymnasts

    Journal of Applied Sport Psychology

    (2003)
  • K. Hodge et al.

    Burnout in elite rugby: relationships with basic psychological needs fulfilment

    Journal of Sports Sciences

    (2008)
  • J. Hollembeak et al.

    Perceived coaching behaviors and college athletes’ intrinsic motivation: a test of self-determination theory

    Journal of Applied Sport Psychology

    (2005)
  • L.-t. Hu et al.

    Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives

    Structural Equation Modeling

    (1999)
  • Cited by (157)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text