Abstract
Abstract. This study examined the factor structure and reliability of the Psychobiosocial States (PBS-S) scale in the assessment of situational performance-related experiences. We administered the scale to 483 Finnish athletes before a practice session to assess the intensity and perceived impact of their performance-related feeling states. The hypothesized two-factor structure indicating functional effects (10 items) and dysfunctional effects (10 items) toward performance was examined via exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Regarding the intensity and perceived impact dimensions of reported states, ESEM and CFA showed a good fit for a two-factor solution of a 14-item PBS-S scale (seven functional and seven dysfunctional items). For both intensity and impact ratings, core state functional modalities were bodily, cognitive, and volitional, while core state dysfunctional modalities were volitional, operational, and anxiety. Findings support the use of a 14-item PBS-S scale to measure a range of preperformance states.
References
2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 397–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510903008204
(2013). Behavioural and psychophysiological correlates of athletic performance: A test of the multi-action plan model. Applied Psychophysiology Biofeedback, 38, 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10484-013-9211-z
(1996). The biopsychosocial model of arousal regulation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 1–51.
(2009). Dispositional goal orientations, motivational climate, and psychobiosocial states in youth sport. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 18–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.01.042
(2015). Self-efficacy, emotional states and performance in carom billiards. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 121, 14–25. https://doi.org/10.2466/30.PMS.121c11x6
(1984). Systemnyje opisanija v psikhologii
([Systems descriptions in psychology] . Leningrad, Russia: Leningrad University Press.2000).
(Individual zones of optimal functioning (IZOF) model: Emotion-performance relationships in sport . In Y. L. HaninEd., Emotions in sport (pp. 65–89). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.2007).
(Emotions in sport: Current issues and perspectives . In G. TenenbaumR. C. EklundEds., Handbook of sport psychology (3rd ed., pp. 31–58). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.2002). Metaphoric description of performance states: An application of the IZOF model. The Sport Psychologist, 16, 396–415.
(1995). Performance affect in junior ice hockey players: An application of the individual zones of optimal functioning model. The Sport Psychologist, 9, 169–187.
(2008). Recent developments in competitive anxiety direction and competition stress research. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1, 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/17509840701827445
(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.
(2005). Development and validation of the Sport Emotion Questionnaire. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 27, 407–431.
(1992). Intensity and direction as dimensions of competitive state anxiety and relationships with competitiveness. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 74, 467–472.
(1987).
(Action control: The maintenance of motivational states . In F. HalischJ. KuhlEds., Motivation, intention, and volition (pp. 279–291). Berlin: Springer.2000). How emotions influence performance in competitive sports. The Sport Psychologist, 14, 229–252.
(2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling, integrating CFA and EFA: Application to students’ evaluations of university teaching. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 439–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510903008220
(2006).
(A competitive anxiety review: Recent directions in sport psychology research . In S. HantonS. D. MellalieuEds., Literature reviews in sport psychology (pp. 1–45). Hauppage, NY: Nova Science.2011). Cross-validation of the short form of the physical self-inventory (PSI-S) using exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM). Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12, 540–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2011.04.003
(2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
(2012).
(Coping in sport through social support . In J. ThatcherM. JonesD. LavalleeEds., Coping and emotion in sport (2nd ed., pp. 102–117). New York, NY: Routledge.2011). Interpersonal synergies. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00038
(2016). Measuring psychobiosocial states in sport: Initial validation of a trait measure. PLoS One, 11, e0167448. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167448
(2004a). Athletes’ self-perceptions of optimal states in karate. Revista de Psicología del Deporte, 13, 229–244.
(2004b). Metaphoric description and individualized emotion profiling of performance related states in high-level karate athletes. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 16, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200490498366
(2016). Assessment of performance-related experiences: An individualized approach. The Sport Psychologist, 30, 201–218.
(2017). The individual zones of optimal functioning (IZOF) model (1978–2014): Historical overview of its development and use. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 15, 41–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2015.1041545
(2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
(1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.219
(