Revision and Validation of the “Motivational Climate in Physical Education Scale” (MCPES) in Chinese educational context

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4925638/v1

This study evaluated the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the “Motivational Climate in Physical Education Scale” (MCPES) among middle school students. Data were collected from 1,010 students, with 473 completing the MCPES, the Physical Needs Support in Physical Education Scale (PNS-PE), and the Youth Sports Friendship Scale (YFQS). Additionally, 437 students completed only the MCPES, and 200 valid retest questionnaires were gathered three weeks later. Exploratory factor analysis identified four factors: perceived autonomy support, perceived social relationship support, perceived task involvement support, and perceived self-involvement support, with a total of 16 items. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the four-factor structure (χ²/df = 3.38, GFI = 0.92, NFI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.07, CFI = 0.93, IFI = 0.93, SRMR = 0.05). The scale exhibited strict measurement invariance across genders and strong invariance across grade levels. It was positively correlated with teacher autonomy support (r = 0.34–0.53) and with each dimension and total score of sports friendship (r = 0.21–0.61). Cronbach’s α coefficients for the MCPES and its dimensions were 0.75, 0.82, 0.79, 0.80, and 0.88, respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for the three-week retest were 0.64, 0.63, 0.72, and 0.76. In conclusion, the Chinese version of the MCPES demonstrates robust reliability and validity for use with middle school students.

Biological sciences/Psychology

Biological sciences/Psychology/Human behaviour

Physical Education Classroom

Motivation Climate

Reliability

Validity

Middle School Students

Classroom teaching occurs in a specific environment, which at the macro level includes both the physical and psychological teaching environments¹. The state of the classroom atmosphere reflects the condition of the psychological environment. The 2022 edition of the Physical Education and Health Curriculum Standards emphasizes the reform of teaching methods, urging a shift toward a "student-centered" approach. This involves updating teaching processes and creating dynamic, engaging contexts that combine interaction, communication, and practical application². The classroom atmosphere is a comprehensive topic that involves multiple disciplines such as pedagogy, educational sociology, and psychology³. Over the past few decades, Achievement Goal Theory (AGT)⁴ and Self-Determination Theory (SDT)⁵ have explored how to create a positive classroom atmosphere from a psychological perspective of motivation, deepening research in this field and becoming a major focus of study. AGT posits that the motivational climate is influenced by social factors in the individual's environment, such as teachers, coaches, parents, and peers, and is shaped by the achievement goals set in specific activities. According to Epstein and Ames, the motivational climate is defined by six dimensions (TARGET): Task, Authority, Reward, Grouping, Evaluation, and Time. Therefore, the teaching behavior of physical education teachers can influence students' personal orientations. Specifically, according to AGT, when students are in a task-oriented environment, success is defined by personal effort, and personal progress, skill development, and learning new abilities are encouraged. However, in an ego-oriented environment, success is defined by comparing one's performance to others, fostering a sense of superiority over peers. Morgan et al. ³ redefined the motivational climate from an interdisciplinary perspective, emphasizing the inclusion of "Relationship" into the TARGET framework, as relationships are critical to fostering effective student motivation. SDT posits that autonomy, competence, and relatedness are key factors influencing individual mental health and social well-being. Environments that satisfy these needs positively impact well-being. Conversely, environments that restrict the fulfillment of these needs can negatively affect human functioning and well-being. All three needs are essential, and if any are unmet, detrimental motivational outcomes may result^5,6. Previous studies have shown that integrating AGT⁴ and SDT⁵ helps to understand students' intrinsic motivation, as both involve social and cognitive factors. The main distinction between the two theories is that AGT focuses solely on competence, dividing it into task-oriented and ego-oriented types. Although SDT also addresses competence, it includes two additional cognitive elements: autonomy and relatedness. These two theories approach competence from different perspectives. In AGT, competence can be described as the driving force of behavior⁴. In SDT, competence is a factor that meets individual needs, influencing subsequent beliefs, emotions, and behaviors^5,7.

Developing a valid and reliable scale is crucial for analyzing the motivational climate in physical education classes. Such a scale can benefit physical education teachers by helping them assess how their teaching behavior affects the motivational climate. International motivational scales are generally based on goal orientation models, such as the Learning and Performance Orientation Questionnaire in Physical Education (LAPOPEQ)⁸, the Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire (PMCSQ)⁹, and the Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire-2 (PMCSQ-2)¹⁰. These scales are primarily based on AGT’s two dimensions of perceived competence. However, SDT’s concepts of autonomy and relatedness are either overlooked or subsumed within these two dimensions. Soini et al.,¹¹ following the recommendations of Duda and Balaguer¹², integrated SDT and AGT into a new framework to develop the MCPES. This scale enhances the theoretical framework by addressing four dimensions related to the environment that satisfy three psychological needs: perceived relatedness, perceived autonomy, task involvement, and ego involvement. The last two dimensions reflect perceptions of competence. This scale has been widely used in various countries and regions and has demonstrated cross-cultural consistency ^13,14.

Empirical research on motivational climate in physical education classes in China is still relatively limited, and research tools are scarce. Adaptation research on motivational climate in physical education classes can help advance the development of this field in China. Creating an appropriate motivational climate is particularly important for physical education teachers. They must understand students' individual learning needs, preferences, and potential issues to avoid negative psychological impacts. Therefore, a reliable tool for measuring motivation is necessary, allowing physical education teachers to gather feedback from students. This enables physical education teachers to adjust their teaching strategies, achieving optimal learning outcomes and creating a lasting motivational climate for current and future students. Hence, this study aims to introduce MCPES to China and explore its applicability among Chinese middle school students. The goal is to develop an effective tool for assessing the motivational climate in physical education classes within the Chinese cultural context.

Participants

Sample 1: Using purposive sampling, 20 first-year middle school students from a general school in Shandong Province were selected to complete the MCPES questionnaire. The sample was evenly divided by gender and comprised students with relatively weaker reading comprehension skills as nominated by their Chinese language teacher.

Sample 2: Convenient sampling was used to select 437 middle school students from two schools in Shandong Province to complete the MCPES questionnaire. This sample included 205 boys and 232 girls, with 178 first-year students, 132 second-year students, and 127 third-year students, aged 12.82 ± 1.13 years.

Sample 3: Convenient sampling was used to select 473 middle school students from two schools in Chongqing to complete the MCPES and criterion-related questionnaires. The sample included 225 boys and 248 girls, with 323 first-year students, 96 second-year students, and 54 third-year students, aged 12.56 ± 1.05 years.

Sample 4: A follow-up test was conducted after two months with 78 students from Sample 2, including 42 boys and 36 girls.

Measures

Motivational Climate in Physical Education Scale (MCPES):

Developed by Soini and colleagues¹¹, the MCPES contains 18 items, divided into four factors: perceived autonomy support, perceived social relatedness support, perceived master involvement support, and perceived ego involvement support. Respondents rate the items on a 5-point Likert scale, from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree."

The MCPES was translated into Chinese using the translation-back translation method. Four university teachers, each holding a Level 8 English proficiency certificate, were responsible for the translation: two for the forward translation and two for the back translation. As mentioned earlier, some MCPES items might not be appropriate for middle school students. Therefore, based on the forward and back translations, feedback from four experienced middle school teachers (each with over 12 years of teaching experience) was incorporated.

Validity Testing Tools:

Youth Sports Friendship Scale (YSFS): The version of the scale revised by Zhu et al.¹⁵ in 2010 was utilized in this study. To better align with the context of physical education classes, the terms "competition" and "training" in the original scale were replaced with "practice." This scale comprises six dimensions: Common Interests and Communication (9 items), Conflict Resolution (3 items), Positive Personal Qualities (3 items), Companionship and Sports Enjoyment (4 items), Self-Esteem Enhancement (3 items), and Sport Support (3 items), making up a total of 25 items. Responses are assessed on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." The scale demonstrated an internal consistency coefficient of 0.98 in this study.

Physical Needs Support in Physical Education Scale (PNS-PE): This questionnaire, originally developed by Williams and Deci (1996) ¹⁶ and later revised into Chinese by Xiang (2014) ¹⁷, contains 15 items across three dimensions: Autonomy Support (6 items), Competence Support (4 items), and Relatedness Support (5 items). Responses are rated on a 5-point Likert scale, from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." In this study, the internal consistency (Cronbach's α) of the scale was 0.92.

Procedure

Convenience cluster sampling was used to select students from grades 6-9 in six middle schools in Shandong Province and Chongqing City as participants. The study began by communicating with the principals of the six schools via phone or in-person meetings to explain the purpose and significance of the research. Four schools agreed to participate in the study. After obtaining school approval, informed consent from parents and/or legal guardians has been obtained.

The study was approved by the Capital Sports Ethics Committee, and all methods were conducted in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. Data were collected using the Wenjuanxing platform. As the primary investigator, I trained the homeroom and PE teachers on how to administer the questionnaire, ensuring they were familiar with the instructions and key considerations. Students completed the questionnaires during PE class in the school's computer lab. For those unable to complete the survey at school, it was completed at home using a computer or mobile phone. All questionnaire items were presented in a random order to mitigate potential sequence, proximity, and priming effects.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS 22.0 and Amos 24.0. Data from Sample 1 were used to test item comprehensibility (participants rated items as "understood" or "not understood"). Data from Sample 2 were used for common method bias testing, item analysis, and exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Data from Sample 3 were used for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), equivalence testing, and criterion-related validity testing. Data from Sample 4 were used to test 2-month retest reliability.

Item Comprehensibility Testing
Twenty middle school students with relatively weaker reading abilities indicated that they understood all 18 items of the Chinese MCPES, suggesting that the items are comprehensible to most middle school students and suitable for larger-scale administration.

Common Method Bias Testing
Since data collection was solely through self-report, common method bias was considered. Necessary controls, such as the examiner, time, location, order, and anonymity, were applied during the testing process, and the Harman single-factor test was used for further statistical control. Results showed that the first factor accounted for 24.46% of the variance, below the critical value of 40%, indicating that common method bias is not a serious concern in this study.

Item Analysis
Item-total correlations were used for item analysis. Results showed that the correlation coefficients between the 18 items and the total score ranged from 0.503 to 0.609 (p < 0.001). Critical ratio analysis was then performed, with the highest 27% of total scores classified as the high group and the lowest 27% as the low group. An independent samples t-test showed no significant difference on item 11 (P > 0.05), while all other items showed significant differences (P < 0.001). These results suggest that the Chinese version of the MCPES has high discriminatory power (Table 1).

Table 1 Item Analysis of the Chinese Version of the MCPES
Item	Item-Total Correlation		Critical Ratio
Item	r	P	t	P
1	0.588	＜0.001	12.826	＜0.001
2	0.567	＜0.001	11.071	＜0.001
3	0.543	＜0.001	11.072	＜0.001
4	0.507	＜0.001	8.611	＜0.001
5	0.573	＜0.001	14.569	＜0.001
6	0.605	＜0.001	12.740	＜0.001
7	0.533	＜0.001	9.252	＜0.001
8	0.552	＜0.001	13.620	＜0.001
9	0.579	＜0.001	10.651	＜0.001
10	0.609	＜0.001	10.766	＜0.001
11	0.562	＜0.001	13.488	＜0.001
12	0.59	＜0.001	10.735	＜0.001
13	0.51	＜0.001	8.968	＜0.001
14	0.579	＜0.001	14.009	＜0.001
15	0.55	＜0.001	14.011	＜0.001
16	0.607	＜0.001	15.699	＜0.001
17	0.562	＜0.001	13.081	＜0.001
18	0.503	＜0.001	14.681	＜0.001

Validity Testing

Construct Validity

EFA was performed on the Chinese version of MCPES using data from Sample 2. Results showed that the KMO value was 0.898 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity yielded χ²(153) = 3276.98, P < 0.001, indicating that factor analysis was appropriate. Principal component analysis with varimax rotation revealed three factors with eigenvalues greater than 1, explaining 52.57% of the variance.

Four factors were consistent with the original structure of the scale and explained 62.10% of the variance. The results indicated that two items (6 and 13) had cross-loadings on two or more factors, with a difference of less than 0.20, so they were removed. The remaining 16 items from Sample 2 were reanalyzed with exploratory factor analysis, extracting four factors. The eigenvalues were 5.35, 2.92, 1.61, and 1.13, with a cumulative variance explained rate of 64.72%. Factor loadings ranged from 0.51 to 0.85. Based on the content of the factors and corresponding items (see Table 2), the factors were named perceived autonomy support, perceived social relatedness support, perceived task involvement support, and perceived ego involvement support.

Table 2: Factor Items and Loadings of the Chinese Version of the MCPES (n = 437)
Item	Factor 1	Factor 2	Factor 3	Factor 4
2. Learning new things (PE knowledge, sports skills) makes me want to learn more.	0.847
1. I believe it's very important to try my best in PE class.	0.797
3. Improving our sports skills every year is the most important thing.	0.769
10. It's important for us to work hard to improve our sports skills.	0.705
5. It’s important for me to show that I am better at sports than others.		0.811
8. In PE class, students compare their performance with others.		0.758
14. It’s important for me to be more successful than others.		0.676
16. In PE class, students compete with each other in performance.		0.511
17. In PE class, we have the opportunity to choose activities based on our interests.			0.786
15. In PE class, we have the freedom to make choices.			0.765
18. In PE class, students can influence the flow of the class.			0.692
11. Students have the opportunity to influence the structure of PE class.			0.52
4. We have developed a strong sense of unity in PE class.				0.76
12. In PE class, students 'work together.'				0.716
7. During PE class, we unite and practice together.				0.7
9. In PE class, we students practice together like a team.				0.576

Data from Sample 3 were used to perform CFA on the four-factor structure of the Chinese version of the Motivational Climate in Physical Education Scale, See Figure 1. The results showed that the factor loadings ranged from 0.63 to 0.81, and the model fit was good (χ²/df = 3.38, GFI = 0.92, NFI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.07, CFI = 0.93, IFI = 0.93).

Measurement Invariance Testing

Measurement invariance testing was conducted on Sample 3 by constructing multiple group models to examine whether the Chinese version of the MCPES demonstrates invariance across gender and grade levels. The results are detailed in Table 3. In the morphological equivalence test, the model fit was deemed acceptable, meeting the criteria for further invariance analysis. Building on this model, factor loadings, intercepts, and residuals were constrained to be equal successively.

For the gender group, the differences in CFI, TLI, and RMSEA (ΔCFI, ΔTLI, ΔRMSEA) between the morphological and weak invariance models, the weak and strong invariance models, and the strong and strict invariance models were all less than 0.01. This indicates that strict invariance across gender was established for the Chinese version of MCPES.

For the grade level group, the differences in CFI, TLI, and RMSEA (ΔCFI, ΔTLI, ΔRMSEA) between the morphological and weak invariance models, as well as between the weak and strong invariance models, were all less than 0.01. However, the ΔCFI between the strong and strict invariance models was 0.018, indicating moderate differences¹⁸, suggesting that strong invariance across grade levels was established for the Chinese version of MCPES.

Table 3 Measurement Invariance Testing Across Gender and Grade Levels
Group	Model	CMIN	DF	CFI	TLI	SRMR	RMSEA[90%CI]	ΔCFI	ΔTLI	ΔRMSEA
Full Sample	Baseline Model	331.597	98	0.93	0.914	0.0527	0.071（0.063,0.080）
Gender	Morphological Invariance	511.028	197	0.908	0.888	0.0651	0.058(0.052,0.064)
	Weak Invariance	534.194	209	0.905	0.891	0.068	0.057(0.051,0.064)	-0.003	0.003	-0.001
	Strong Invariance	545.833	218	0.904	0.895	0.0767	0.057(0.051,0.062)	-0.001	0.004	0
	Strict Invariance	584.79	234	0.898	0.895	0.0787	0.056(0.051,0.062)	-0.006	0	-0.001
Grade	Morphological Invariance	637.98	295	0.902	0.88	0.049	0.05(0.044,0.055)
	Weak Invariance	680.186	319	0.896	0.883	0.0498	0.049(0.044,0.054)	-0.006	0.003	-0.001
	Strong Invariance	711.422	338	0.893	0.886	0.0511	0.048(0.044,0.053)	-0.003	0.003	-0.001
	Strict Invariance	804.513	370	0.875	0.879	0.0511	0.05(0.045,0.055)	-0.018	-0.007	0.002

Criterion Validity

Pearson correlation analysis was used to calculate the criterion-related validity, using the scores of the MCPES, YFQS, and PNS-PE. The results in Table 4 show that the total score and each dimension of the MCPES were significantly positively correlated with both YFQS and PNS-PE.

Table 4 Criterion-Related Validity of the MCPES (n=473)
Criterion Variables	MCPES	MAS	PER	AUT	REL
Physical Education Needs Support Scale	0.528**	0.471**	0.337**	0.408**	0.453**
Autonomy Support	0.509**	0.492**	0.290**	0.323**	0.495**
Competence Support	0.494**	0.451**	0.322**	0.330**	0.422**
Relatedness Support	0.498**	0.372**	0.368**	0.376**	0.377**
Youth Sports Friendship Scale	0.559**	0.614**	0.264**	0.364**	0.594**
Common Interests and Communication	0.537**	0.581**	0.257**	0.356**	0.563**
Conflict Resolution	0.526**	0.576**	0.263**	0.343**	0.539**
Positive Personal Qualities	0.504**	0.526**	0.278**	0.335**	0.499**
Companionship and Sport Enjoyment	0.500**	0.543**	0.235**	0.326**	0.538**
Self-Esteem Enhancement	0.497**	0.577**	0.207**	0.306**	0.560**
Sport Support	0.515**	0.593**	0.207**	0.326**	0.582**
Note：**P<0.001

Reliability Testing

Internal Consistency Reliability: According to Nunally (1978)¹⁹, a Cronbach’s α coefficient > 0.9 indicates excellent reliability, 0.7 < α < 0.9 indicates high reliability, 0.35 < α < 0.7 indicates moderate reliability, and α < 0.35 indicates low reliability. In practice, a Cronbach’s α greater than 0.7 is commonly used as the standard²⁰. For Sample 2, Cronbach’s α coefficients for autonomy support, relatedness support, mastery climate, performance climate, and the overall scale were 0.72, 0.84, 0.81, 0.89, and 0.86, respectively. For Sample 3, the corresponding Cronbach’s α coefficients were 0.75, 0.82, 0.79, 0.80, and 0.88.

Test-Retest Reliability: Although motivational climate has contextual characteristics, it is also a relatively stable trait. Therefore, in this study, the MCPES was retested after a 2-month interval to examine test-retest reliability. For Sample 4, the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for perceived autonomy support, perceived social relatedness support, perceived task involvement support, perceived ego involvement support, and the overall scale were 0.64, 0.63, 0.72, 0.70, and 0.76, respectively.

This study targeted middle school students and conducted a preliminary revision of the widely used MCPES. While some positive results were obtained, certain findings warrant further investigation.

Item analysis results indicate that the Chinese version of MCPES, with its 18 items, demonstrated good item discrimination and high consistency between each item and the total score. In terms of content validity, since the original MCPES was designed for middle school students aged 14-15, this study expanded the target group to include all middle school students aged 12-15. To verify the suitability of the scale items for this age group, 20 first-year students (aged 12-13) with relatively weaker reading abilities were selected to analyze the content of the 18 translated items. All items were found to be understandable by most middle school students. For item 7, the initial translation was “During practice in class, our goal in PE is to achieve unity.” However, this item aimed to emphasize the perception of peer support during class. Although the translation was relatively accurate, it did not fully capture the item's intent. Therefore, it was revised to “During PE class, we unite and practice together.”

Regarding construct validity, EFA revealed that items 6 and 13 exhibited cross-loadings on two or more factors, with cross-loading differences less than 0.20, leading to their removal. The remaining items produced four dimensions: perceived autonomy support, perceived social relatedness support, perceived task involvement support, and perceived ego involvement support, consistent with the theoretical framework proposed by Soini et al., based on self-determination theory and achievement goal theory¹¹.

The results of the CFA indicated that the four-factor structure of the Chinese version of the MCPES demonstrated good model fit, suggesting good stability. This structure was consistent with both the original¹¹ and the Greek version¹⁴ of the scale. Additionally, this study conducted measurement invariance testing across gender and grade levels for the Chinese version of MCPES by constructing multi-group models. The results showed that strict invariance across gender and strong invariance across grade levels were established for the revised MCPES, supporting its applicability across different gender and grade groups of middle school students.

Correlation analysis between the total score and four dimensions of the Chinese version of MCPES and the criterion variables revealed significant positive correlations with teacher autonomy support. Teachers' evaluation of instructional goals and reward processes determines whether the classroom motivational climate is task-involved or ego-involved. Teacher autonomy support fosters an engaging and proactive classroom atmosphere, consistent with previous research findings^21,22. Furthermore, the total score and dimensions of the MCPES were significantly positively correlated with the Sport Friendship Quality Scale and its dimensions, consistent with previous studies^23–25. Peers may influence achievement motivation by creating specific motivational climates. For example, Wentzel et al.²⁶ found that through cooperative learning activities, peers held each other accountable for certain behaviors, provided help, and shared knowledge, which contributed to the formation of a task-involved climate. The results of the Chinese version of MCPES showed good consistency and temporal stability, indicating that the scale has good reliability among Chinese middle school students. It can be used to assess the motivational climate in PE classes and provide a new tool for evaluating PE instruction.

Data availability

The dataset used during the current study is available on reasonable request from the corresponding author

Author contributions

Q.Z. designed the study, interpreted the results, and drafted and edited the manuscript. Y.S. and E.F. prepared the materials and participated in data collection and analysis. W.D. critically revised the draft of the manuscript and was responsible for funding acquisition. All authors have approved the final version of the manuscript.

Wang, S. H. A Glimpse into Research on Classroom Atmosphere. Educational Exploration 37–38 (2007).
"Health First" and Educating Through Sports—An Interpretation of the Physical Education and Health Curriculum Standards for Compulsory Education (2022 Edition). Basic Education Curriculum 74–80 (2022).
Morgan, K. Reconceptualizing Motivational Climate in Physical Education and Sport Coaching: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Quest 69, 95–112 (2017).
Nicholls, J. G. The Competitive Ethos and Democratic Education. 261 (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, US, 1989).
Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. Contemporary Sociology 3, (1985).
Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol 55, 68–78 (2000).
Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. The ‘What’ and ‘Why’ of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychol. Inq. 11, 227–268 (2000).
Papaioannou, A. Development of a Questionnaire to Measure Achievement Orientations in Physical Education. Research quarterly for exercise and sport 65, 11–20 (1994).
Seifriz, J. J., Duda, J. L. & Chi, L. The relationship of perceived motivational climate to intrinsic motivation and beliefs about success in basketball. J. Sport Exercise Psy. 14, 375–391 (1992).
Walling, M. D., Duda, J. L. & Chi, L. The Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport Questionnaire: Construct and predictive validity. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology 15, 172–183 (1993).
Soini, M., Liukkonen, J., Watt, A., Yli-Piipari, S. & Jaakkola, T. Factorial validity and internal consistency of the motivational climate in physical education scale. J. Sport. Sci. Med. 13, 137–144 (2014).
Duda, J. L. & Balaguer, I. Coach-Created Motivational Climate. in Social Psychology in Sport 117–130 (Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL, US, 2007). doi:10.5040/9781492595878.ch-009.
Jaakkola, T., Wang, C. K. J., Soini, M. & Liukkonen, J. Students’ Perceptions of Motivational Climate and Enjoyment in Finnish Physical Education: A Latent Profile Analysis. J. Sport. Sci. Med. 14, 477–483 (2015).
Topatsi, A. et al. The “Motivational Climate in Physical Education Scale”(MCPES) in Greek educational context of elementary school: Psychometric properties. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education 12, 321–324 (2020).
Zhu, Y., Guo, L. Y., Chen, P., & Xu, C. The Model Construction of Peer Relationships, Adolescent Sports Motivation, and Behavioral Engagement. Journal of Tianjin Institute of Physical Education 25, 218–223 (2010).
Williams, G. C. & Deci, E. L. Internalization of biopsychosocial values by medical students: A test of self-determination theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70, 767–779 (1996).
Xiang, M. Q. The Relationship between Physical Autonomy Support and Adolescents' Extracurricular Exercise—The Mediating Role of Basic Psychological Needs. Sports and Science 35, 96–100 (2014).
Wang, M. C. Latent Variable Modeling and Mplus Application: Basic Edition. (Chongqing University Press, Chongqing, 2014).
Nunally, J. C. Psychometric theory (2nd ed. ) New York: McGraw-Hill. (1978).
Li, H. Z. Methodology of Management Research. Xi’an Jiaotong University Press, 2000.
Barkoukis, V. & Hagger, M. S. The trans-contextual model: perceived learning and performance motivational climates as analogues of perceived autonomy support. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 28, 353–372 (2013).
Koka, A. The effect of teacher and peers need support on students’ motivation in physical education and its relationship to leisure time physical activity. Acta Kinesiologiae Universitatis Tartuensis 19, 48 (2013).
Ntoumanis, N., Taylor, I. M. & Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C. A longitudinal examination of coach and peer motivational climates in youth sport: Implications for moral attitudes, well-being, and behavioral investment. Dev. Psychol. 48, 213–223 (2012).
Ntoumanis, N. & Vazou, S. Peer Motivational Climate in Youth Sport: Measurement Development and Validation. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 27, 432–455 (2005).
Cox, A., Duncheon, N. & McDavid, L. Peers and Teachers as Sources of Relatedness Perceptions, Motivation, and Affective Responses in Physical Education. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 80, 765–773 (2009).
Wentzel, K. R. Social-motivational processes and interpersonal relationships: Implications for understanding motivation at school. Journal of Educational Psychology 91, 76–97 (1999).

No competing interests reported.

Revision and Validation of the “Motivational Climate in Physical Education Scale” (MCPES) in Chinese educational context

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Results

Validity Testing

Discussion

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1