تعیین روایی و پایایی نسخة فارسی پرسشنامة علل نگرانی از آسیب مجدد

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه علوم ورزشی دانشگاه سمنان، سمنان، ایران

2 کارشناس ارشد رفتار حرکتی، دانشگاه سمنان، سمنان، ایران

چکیده

هدف از پژوهش حاضر، تعیین روایی و پایایی نسخة فارسی پرسشنامة علل نگرانی از آسیب مجدد بود. بهمنظور اجرای
این پژوهش، نسخخة نیایی پرسخشخنامة علل نگرانی از آسخیب مجدد در ورزشخرارا آسخیبدیده، پس از طی کرد روند
بازترجمه و بیرهمندی از نظر اسخخدادا مدخ خخ در حوزو علوز ورزشخخی تدوین شخخد و 195 نفر از ورزشخخرارا با تجربة
آسخخیب بهصخخور نمونهگیری ت خخادفی خوشخخهای اندخاب شخخدند. در این زمینه از آمار توصخخیفی و اسخخدنطاطی برای
تجزیهوتحلیل دادهها اسدفاده شد، بهطوریکه در بخش آمار اسدنطاطی از تحلیل عام لی تأییدی و ضریب آلفای کرونطاخ و
ضخخریب همطسخخدگی درو ططقهای اسخخدفاده شخخد. ندایج نشخخا دهندو برازش مطلوب مدل تحلیل عاملی نسخخخة فارسخخی
پر س شنامة علل نگرانی از آ سیب مجدد بود. همچنین ندایج ضریب آلفای کرونطاخ و ضریب همط سدگی درو ططقهای،
نشخخخا دهند و همسخخخانی درونی و پایا یی زمانی مطلوب این ابزار بود. احدمالاً ترجمة مطلوب و اندخا ب نمونة نامدجانس،
زمینهساز برازش مطلوب مدل تحلیل عاملی بوده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Determination of Validity and Reliability of the Persian Version of Causes of Re-Injury Worry Scale

نویسندگان [English]

  • vali ollah kashani 1
  • Mohamad Ali Salianeh 1
  • Asie Paran Davaji 2
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Sport Sciences, University of Semnan, Semnan, Iran
2 . MSc of Motor Behavior, University of Semnan, Semnan, Iran
چکیده [English]

The aim of this study was to determine validity and reliability of the Persian version of causes of re-injury worry scale. A final version of this scale in injured athletes was translated and developed based on the feedbacks provided by experts in sport sciences and 195 athletes who had experienced injury were selected by cluster random sampling method. The data were analyzed using inferential statistics (confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Cronbach’s alpha and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC)) and descriptive statistics. The findings indicated good fit of the CFA model over the Persian version of this scale. In addition, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and ICC demonstrated acceptable internal consistency and temporal validity of this scale. Proper translation and selecting a heterogeneous sample may have contributed to the good fit of the CFA model.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • ability of opponent
  • causes of worry
  • construct validity
  • rehabilitation
  • re-injury
  • reliability
1. Christakou A, Zervas Y, Stavrou NA, Psychountaki M. Development and validation of the causes of re-injury worry questionnaire. Psychology, health & medicine. 2011;16(1):94-114.
2. Eysenck MW, Van Berkum J. Trait anxiety, defensiveness, and the structure of worry. Personality and Individual Differences. 1992;13(12):1285-90.
3. Borkovec TD, Robinson E, Pruzinsky T, DePree JA. Preliminary exploration of worry: Some characteristics and processes. Behaviour research and therapy. 1983;21(1):9-16.
4. Borkovec T. The nature, functions, and origins of worry. 1994.
5. Mathews A. Why worry? The cognitive function of anxiety. Behaviour research and therapy. 1990;28(6):455-68.
6. Endler NS, editor Interactionism: a personality model, but not yet a theory. Nebraska symposium on motivation; 1982: University of Nebraska Press.
1. Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia
168 رشد و یادگیری حرکتی _ ورزشی، دورة 11 ، شمارة 2، تابستان 1398
7. Spielberger CD. Assessment of state and trait anxiety: Conceptual and methodological issues. Southern Psychologist. 1985.
8. March JS, Parker JD, Sullivan K, Stallings P, Conners CK. The Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children (MASC): factor structure, reliability, and validity. Journal of the American academy of child & adolescent psychiatry. 1997;36(4):554-65.
9. Hackfort D, Schwenkmezger P. Measuring anxiety in sports: Perspectives and problems. Anxiety in sports: An international perspective. 1989:55-74.
10. Heil J. The injured athlete. In Y. Hanin (Ed.), Emotions in sport Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2000.
11. Taylor J, Taylor S. Psychological approaches to sports injury rehabilitation: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1997.
12. Udry E, Gould D, Bridges D, Beck L. Down but not out: Athlete responses to season-ending injuries. Journal of sport and exercise psychology. 1997;19(3):229-48.
13. Kvist J, Ek A, Sporrstedt K, Good L. Fear of re-injury: a hindrance for returning to sports after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy. 2005;13(5):393-7.
14. Podlog L, Eklund RC. Professional coaches’ perspectives on the return to sport following serious injury. Journal of applied sport psychology. 2007;19(2):207-25.
15. Murphy SM. Sport psychology interventions: Human Kinetics Champaign, IL; 1995.
16. Dover G, Amar V. Development and validation of the athlete fear avoidance questionnaire. Journal of athletic training. 2015;50(6):634-42.
17. Webster KE, Feller JA, Lambros C. Development and preliminary validation of a scale to measure the psychological impact of returning to sport following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery. Physical therapy in sport. 2008;9(1):9-15.
18. Walker N, Thatcher J, Lavallee D. A preliminary development of the Re-Injury Anxiety Inventory (RIAI). Physical Therapy in Sport. 2010;11(1):23-9.
19. Christakou A, Zervas Y, Psychountaki M, Stavrou NA. Development and validation of the attention questionnaire of rehabilitated athletes returning to competition. Psychology, health & medicine. 2012;17(4):499-510.
20. Christakou A1 ZY, Stavrou NA, Psychountaki M. Development and validation of the Causes of Re-Injury Worry Questionnaire. Psychol Health Med. 2011;16(1):94-114.
21. Rasool Zeidabadi FR, Ebrahim Moteshare. Psychometric Properties and Normalization of Persian Version of. Ottawa Mental Skills Assessment Tools (OMSAT-3). Sport Psychology Review. 2014;3(7):63-82.
22. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling: Guilford publications; 2015.
23. Meyers MC, Bourgeois AE, Stewart S, LeUnes A. Predicting pain response in athletes: Development and assessment of the Sports Inventory for Pain. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 1992;14(3):249-61.
24. Terry PC, Lane AM, Fogarty GJ. Construct validity of the Profile of Mood States—Adolescents for use with adults. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2003;4(2):125-39.
تعیین روایی و پایایی نسخة فارسی پرسشنامة علل نگرانی از آسیب مجدد 169
25. Schutz RW G, M.E. Use, misuse, and disuse of psychometrics in sport
psychology research. In R.N. Singer, M. Murphy, and L.K. Tennant (Eds.). Handbook of
research on sport psychology1993. 901-17. p.
26. Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sage focus editions. 1993;154:136-.
27. Hu Lt, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal. 1999;6(1):1-55.
28. Podlog L, Eklund RC. The psychosocial aspects of a return to sport following serious injury: a review of the literature from a self-determination perspective. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2007;8(4):535-66.
29. Daly JM, Brewer BW, Van Raalte JL, Petitpas AJ, Sklar JH. Cognitive appraisal, emotional adjustment, and adherence to rehabilitation following knee surgery. Journal of Sport Rehabilitation. 1995;4(1):23-30.