Examination of Psychometric Properties of the Irrational Performance Belief Inventory-2

  • Urfa O
  • Aşçı F
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to test the reliability and the validity of the Turkish version of the Irrational Performance Belief Inventory-2 (iPBI-2) for athletes. One-hundred ninety-six males and 107 females, a total of 303 athletes, voluntarily participated in this study. The iPBI-2 is the short form of the 28-item Irrational Performance Belief Inventory. The iPBI-2 is a five-point Likert scale that includes 20 items. The iPBI-2 assesses the irrational beliefs of athletes on 4 subscales: Demandingness, Awfulizing, Low Frustration Tolerance, and Depreciation. Confirmatory factor analysis and convergent validity were used to test the construct validity. The Sport Anxiety Scale-2 and the Sport Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale were administered to test the construct validity, and the Irrational Belief Scale Short Form was administered to test the convergent validity of the iPBI-2. In addition, internal reliability coefficients were computed for each subscale. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the Turkish scale is consistent with the original four-factor structure. The Pearson correlation analysis for testing the convergent validity revealed significant and positive relationships between the iPBI-2 subscales and sport anxiety, irrational beliefs, and sport perfectionism. The internal consistency of the total scale was .88, and of the subscales ranged between .83 (Demandingness subscale) and .86 (Low Frustration Tolerance and Depreciation subscales). We conclude that the four-factor model of the iPBI-2 is appropriate for measuring irrational beliefs about performance of Turkish athletes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Urfa, O., & Aşçı, F. H. (2018). Examination of Psychometric Properties of the Irrational Performance Belief Inventory-2. Psikoloji Çalışmaları / Studies in Psychology, 219–236. https://doi.org/10.26650/sp2018-0004

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free