Psychometrische Eigenschaften einer deutschsprachigen Übersetzung des Mental Toughness Inventory (MTI-D)
Abstract
Zusammenfassung. Das Mental Toughness Inventory (MTI; Middleton, Martin & Marsh, 2011) ist ein Selbstbeurteilungsinstrument zur Erfassung von 12 Facetten mentaler Stärke im Sport oder anderen leistungsbezogenen Kontexten. Ins Deutsche übersetzt, wurde das MTI–D an einer deutschsprachigen Stichprobe (N = 1 122), davon n = 914 Athletinnen und Athleten und n = 208 Studierende der Sportwissenschaft aus 41 Sportarten hinsichtlich Faktorstruktur, Messinvarianz, Reliabilität, Konstrukt- und Kriteriumsvalidität untersucht. Entsprechend der theoretischen Konzeption ergaben Bifaktorenanalysen für das MTI–D eine Struktur mit einem gemeinsamen Faktor und 12 spezifischen Faktoren. Die Reliabilität (ω) der Gesamtskala und der Subskalen lag zwischen .81 und .98, während die Werte für omega hierarchical subscale tiefer lagen (.07 ≤ ωHS ≤ .77). Der globale und die spezifischen Faktoren korrelierten hypothesenkonform mit dem Engagement und Leistungsniveau im Sport sowie dem Test of Performance Strategies (TOPS-D; Schmid, Birrer, Kaiser & Seiler, 2010) zur Erfassung mentaler Strategien im Sport. Zwar könnten einzelne Faktoren optimiert werden, doch es liegen Hinweise darauf vor, dass mit dem MTI–D mentale Stärke reliabel und valide erfasst werden kann.
Abstract. The Mental Toughness Inventory (MTI; Middleton, Martin, & Marsh, 2011) is a self-description questionnaire measuring 12 facets of mental toughness in sports or other performance-oriented contexts. The German translation of the MTI, the MTI–D, was analyzed with respect to its factorial structure, measurement invariance, reliability, construct validity, and criterion validity using a German-speaking sample of N = 1,122 individuals comprising n = 914 athletes and n = 208 sport science students involved in 41 different sports. In line with the theoretical concept of the MTI and using a (bifactor) exploratory and confirmatory structural equation modeling framework, the analyses of the MTI–D yielded a factor structure with one general factor and 12 domain-specific factors. The results supported the measurement invariance of the MTI–D across gender and age. Omega estimates of composite reliability (ω) for the global and the domain-specific scales ranged between .81 and .91, while the omega hierarchical subscale was much lower (.07 ≤ ωHS ≤ .77). The MTI–D factors correlated in predictable ways with degree of sport involvement, level of achievement in sport, and the Test of Performance Strategies (TOPS-D; Schmid, Birrer, Kaiser, & Seiler, 2010), an instrument measuring mental strategies in sports. Despite the fact that some factors await further refinement, there is preliminary evidence that the MTI–D can be used as a reliable and valid questionnaire for assessing mental toughness.
Literatur
2016). Improved representation of the Self-Perception Profile for Children through bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling. American Educational Research Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216666490
(2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 397 – 438.
(1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
(2007).
(Why do athletes choke under pressure ? In G. TenenbaumR. C. EklundEds., Handbook of sport psychology (3rd ed., pp. 425 – 444). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.2010). Statistik für Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler (7. Aufl.). Berlin: Springer.
(2015). Confirmatory factor analysis. London, United Kingdom: Guilford.
(2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464 – 504.
(2002).
(Mental toughness: The concept and its measurement . In I. CockerillEd., Solutions in sport psychology (pp. 32 – 46). London, United Kingdom: Thomson Learning.2010).
(Mental toughness in sport: Conceptual and practical issues . In S. D. MellalieuS. HantonEds., Advances in applied sport psychology: A review (pp. 317 – 346). New York, NY: Routledge.2011). Mentale Toughness im Sport. Sportwissenschaft, 41, 283 – 299.
(2013). Are adolescents with high mental toughness levels more resilient against stress? Stress and Health, 29, 164 – 171.
(2012). Progressing measurement in mental toughness: A case example of the Mental Toughness Questionnaire 48. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 1, 194 – 214.
(2011).
(Measuring mental toughness. Current status and future directions . In D. F. GucciardiS. GordonEds., Mental toughness in sport: Developments in theory and research (pp. 108 – 132). New York, NY: Routledge.2009). A behavioural genetic study of mental toughness and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 100 – 105.
(1998). Testaufbau und Testanalyse (6. Aufl.). Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union.
(1986). Mental toughness training for sports: Achieving athletic excellence. Lexington, MA: Stephen Greene Press.
(2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling, integrating CFA and EFA: Application to students’ evaluations of university teaching. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 439 – 476.
(1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2004a, July). Developing the Mental Toughness Inventory (MTI). Paper presented at the 3rd International Biennial SELF Research Conference on Self-Concept, Motivation and Identity: Where to go from here? Berlin. Retrieved from http://researchdirect.uws.edu.au/islandora/object/uws%3 A7274
(2004b, July). Discovering mental toughness: A qualitative study of mental toughness in elite athletes. Paper presented at the 3rd International Biennial SELF Research Conference on Self-Concept, Motivation and Identity: Where to go from here? Berlin. Retrieved from http://www.sectiononewrestling.com/discovering_mental_toughness.pdf
(2005a). Developing a test for mental toughness: The Mental Toughness Inventory (MTI). Paper presented at the Joint AARE/NZARE Conference, Parramatta, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/data/publications/2005/mid05310.pdf
(2005b). Making the leap from good to great: Comparisons between sub-elite and elite athletes on mental toughness. Paper presented at the Joint AARE/NZARE Conference, Parramatta, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/data/publications/2005/mid05301.pdf
(2004). The Psychological Performance Inventory: Is the mental toughness test tough enough? International Journal of Sport Psychology, 35, 91 – 108.
(2011).
(Development and validation of the Mental Toughness Inventory (MTI): Construct validation approach . In D. F. GucciardiS. GordonEds., Mental toughness in sport: Developments in theory and research (pp. 91 – 107). New York, NY: Routledge.2016). A bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling framework for the identification of distinct sources of construct-relevant psychometric multidimensionality. Structural Equation Modeling, 23, 116 – 139.
(1998 – 2015). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
(2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 667 – 696.
(2013). Scoring and modeling psychological measures in the presence of multidimensionality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95,129 – 140.
(2011).
(Coping and mental toughness . In D. CollinsA. AbbottH. RichardsEds., Performance psychology: A practitioner’s guide (pp. 281 – 300). Edinburgh, United Kingdom: Elsevier.2016). Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices. Psychological Methods, 21, 137 – 150.
(2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66, 507 – 514.
(2010). Psychometrische Eigenschaften einer deutschsprachigen Adaptation des Test of Performance Strategies (TOPS): Ein Instrument zur Erfassung psychischer Fertigkeiten im Sport. Zeitschrift für Sportpsychologie, 17, 50 – 62.
(1999).
(A psychometric evaluation of a German version of the Loehr Test and the Sports Emotional-Reaction Profile . In V. HosekP. TilingerL. BilekEds., Psychology of sport and exercise: Enhancing the quality of life. Proceedings of the 10th European Congress of Sport Psychology – FEPSAC (Part 2, pp. 148 – 150). Prague, Czech Republic: Charles University.1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 48, 407 – 441.
(2012). Mental Toughness: The mindset behind sporting achievement (2nd ed.). London, United Kingdom: Routledge.
(2009). Progress toward construct validation of the Sports Mental Toughness Questionnaire (SMTQ). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 25, 186 – 193.
(1989). Vers une méthodologie de validation trans-culturelle de questionnaires psychologiques: Implications pour la recherche en langue française. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 30, 662 – 680.
(