SavedAdd your journal

Journals / SPORMETRE Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 4

THE MOVEMENT IMAGERY QUESTIONNAIRE-3: RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY STUDY ON TURKISH SAMPLE

Yunus UĞUR
Hamit COŞKUN
Ahmet Yasin ŞENYURT
Pages
145–156
Publication Date
2021-12-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results showed that the goodness of fit indices was satisfactory, (χ2 (51) = 87.88, p <.001, CMIN / DF = 1.73, RMSEA = .08 (90% CI = 0.06-0.07), SRMR = .06, NFI = 0.82, CFI = 0.91, and TLI = .89). 0.75 CR and 0.43 AVE values for the internal-visual imagery subscale, 0.76 CR and 0.46 AVE values for the external-visual imagery subscale, and 0.84 CR and 0.57 AVE values for the kinesthetic imagery subscale was obtained.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of the present study was to test the reliability and validity of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-3 (MIQ-3) (Williams et al., 2012) among a Turkish sample.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study was conducted with 136 (104 women, 32 men) university students.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results showed that the goodness of fit indices was satisfactory, (χ2 (51) = 87.88, p <.001, CMIN / DF = 1.73, RMSEA = .08 (90% CI = 0.06-0.07), SRMR = .06, NFI = 0.82, CFI = 0.91, and TLI = .89). 0.75 CR and 0.43 AVE values for the internal-visual imagery subscale, 0.76 CR and 0.46 AVE values for the external-visual imagery subscale, and 0.84 CR and 0.57 AVE values for the kinesthetic imagery subscale was obtained.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2012 Verileri
⚙️Variables:imgeleme yeteneği · geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik çalışması · İmgeleme

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to test the reliability and validity of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-3 (MIQ-3) (Williams et al., 2012) among a Turkish sample. The study was conducted with 136 (104 women, 32 men) university students. Participants are in the 19-29 age range (Mage = 20.97, SD = 1.67). 81 of the participants (59.6%) reported that they were licenced athlete before. The MIQ-3 (Williams et al., 2012), consists of 12 items and three subscales (internal-visual imagery, external-visual imagery, kinesthetic imagery), was developed to assess the imagery ability of individuals towards certain basic movements. The participants were asked to rate the level of ease/difficulty of the imagery task of these movements on a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 = very hard to see/feel; 7 = very easy to see/feel). The results showed that the goodness of fit indices was satisfactory, (χ2 (51) = 87.88, p <.001, CMIN / DF = 1.73, RMSEA = .08 (90% CI = 0.06-0.07), SRMR = .06, NFI = 0.82, CFI = 0.91, and TLI = .89). 0.75 CR and 0.43 AVE values for the internal-visual imagery subscale, 0.76 CR and 0.46 AVE values for the external-visual imagery subscale, and 0.84 CR and 0.57 AVE values for the kinesthetic imagery subscale was obtained. In conclusion, we suggest that the Turkish version of the "Movement Imagery Questionnaire-3" is a valid and reliable scale in measuring individuals' imagery ability.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Hareket İmgeleme Ölçeği-3'nin (Williams vd., 2012) Türkiye örneklemi üzerindeki güvenirlik ve geçerliğini test etmektir. Çalışma 136 (104 kadın, 32 erkek) üniversite öğrencisi ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Katılımcılar 19-29 yaş aralığındadır ("(X" ) ̅yaş = 20.97, Ss = 1.67). Katılımcıların 81’i (%59,6) daha önce lisanslı olarak sporla ilgilendiğini bildirmiştir. 12 madde ve üç alt boyuttan (içsel-görsel imgeleme, dışsal-görsel imgeleme, kinestetik imgeleme) oluşmakta olan ölçek bireylerin belirli temel hareketlere yönelik imgeleme yeteneklerini değerlendirmek için geliştirilmiştir. Katılımcılardan bu hareketlere dair imgeleme görevinin kolaylık/zorluk düzeyini 7'li Likert tipi (1= Görmek/Hissetmek çok zor-7=Görmek/Hissetmek çok kolay) bir ölçekte derecelendirmeleri istenmiştir. Sonuçlar uyum iyiliği indekslerinin tatmin edici olduğunu göstermiştir, (χ2 (51) = 87.88, p <.001, CMIN / DF = 1.73, RMSEA = .08 (% 90 CI = 0.06-0.07), SRMR = .06, NFI = 0.82, CFI = 0.91 ve TLI = .89). İçsel-görsel imgeleme alt boyutu için 0.75 CR ve 0.43 AVE değerleri, dışsal-görsel imgeleme alt boyutu için 0.76 CR ve 0.46 AVE değerleri ve kinestetik imgeleme alt boyutu için 0.84 CR ve 0.57 AVE değerleri elde edilmiştir. Sonuç olarak, Hareket İmgeleme Ölçeğinin Türkçe versiyonunun bireylerin imgeleme yeteneğini ölçmede geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçek olduğu söylenebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

UĞUR, Y., COŞKUN, H., ŞENYURT, A. Y. (2021). THE MOVEMENT IMAGERY QUESTIONNAIRE-3: RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY STUDY ON TURKISH SAMPLE. SPORMETRE Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 4, 145–156. https://ajindex.com/articles/700617

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Betts, G. H. (1909). The distribution and functions of mental imagery (No. 26). Ams Press.
  2. Bryne, B. M. (2010). Structural Equation Modeling with Amos: Basic Concepts, Application and Programming. (2nd ed.). Routledge. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: istatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum. [Data analysis handbook for social sciences: statistics, research design, SPSS applications and interpretation.]. Ankara,
  3. Pegem Academy Publishing Child, D. (2006). The essentials of factor analysis. (3rd ed.). Continuum. Dilek, B., Ayhan, Ç., Yakut, Y. (2020). Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the movement imagery questionnaire 3: Its cultural adaptation and psychometric properties. Neurological Sciences and Neurophysiology, 37(4), 221-227. https://doi.org/10.4103/NSN.NSN_30_20
  4. Driskell, J. E., Copper, C., Moran, A. (1994). Does mental practice enhance performance? Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 481. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.4.481
  5. Duarte-Mendes, P., Marinho, D. A., Serrano, J., Paulo, R., Faustino, A., Ramalho, A., Petrica, J. (2019). Differences of Imagery ability between youth soccer and swimming practitioners. Journal of Human Sport & Exercise, 14(Proc 4), 1651-1654. https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2019.14.Proc4.82
  6. Faull, A. L., Jones, E. S. (2018). Development and validation of the Wheelchair Imagery Ability Questionnaire (WIAQ) for use in wheelchair sports. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 37, 196-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2017.11.015
  7. Fornell, C., Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (3), 328–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800313
  8. Goss, S., Hall, C., Buckolz, E., Fishburne, G. (1986). Imagery ability and the acquisition and retention of movements. Memory & cognition, 14(6), 469-477. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202518
  9. Gregg, M., Hall, C., Nederhof, E. (2005).
  10. The Imagery Ability, Imagery Use, and Performance Relationship. Sport psychologist, 19(1), 93-99 https://doi.org/10.1123/TSP.19.1.93
  11. Hall, C. R., Mack, D. E., Paivio, A., Hausenblas, H. A. (1998). Imagery use by athletes: development of the Sport Imagery Questionnaire. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 29(1), 73–89.
  12. Hall, C. R., Martin, K. A. (1997). Measuring movement imagery abilities: a revision of the movement imagery questionnaire. Journal of Mental Imagery, 21(1-2