This three-part study aimed to translate, cross-culturally adapt, and validate the Collective Efficacy Questionnaire for Sports (CEQS) for Brazilian athletes. In Study 1, six translators and six specialists developed a Portuguese version of the CEQS (the CEQS-B), and 10 experts and 10 sports participants provided content validity evidence based on test content. In Study 2, 553 athletes completed the CEQS-B, and we provided evidence of construct and convergent validity for the test’s internal structure through factor analysis and of reliability evidence based on the instrument’s internal consistency and temporal stability. In Study 3, 79 athletes completed both the new CEQS-B and the Group Cohesion Questionnaire, and we provided evidence of concurrent validity for the CEQS-B, based on its relationship to other variables, with specific strong correlations between team task cohesion and collective efficacy among these participants. Overall, the results of this study support the use of the CEQS-B by researchers and professionals wishing to assess various sport athletes’ self-perceived collective efficacy.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing.
American Educational Research Association.
2.
AndradeJ. M. D., & ValentiniF. (2018).
Diretrizes para a Construção de Testes Psicológicos: a Resolução CFP n° 009/2018 em Destaque [Guidelines for the construction of psychological tests: Regulation CFP No: 009/2018 in highlight]. Psychology: Science and Profession,
38(spe), 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-3703000208890
3.
BagozziR. P.YiY. (1988).
On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
16, 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75--78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064
6.
BanduraA. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.
W.H Freeman.
7.
BentlerP. M. (2006). EQS 6 Structural Equations Program Manual.
Multivariate Software, Inc.
8.
BoughattasW.KridisN. (2017).
Exploring the relationship between cohesion and collective efficacy in Tunisian sports teams: Validation of the Tunisian version of the Collective Efficacy Questionnaire for Collective Sports. International Journal of Science Culture and Sport,
5(22), 46–59. https://doi.org/10.14486/intjscs645
9.
Bray, S. R., & Widmeyer, W. N. (2000). Athletes' perceptions of the home advantage: An investigation of perceived causal factors. Journal of Sport Behavior, 23(1), 1--10.
10.
BrutonA. M.MellalieuS. D.ShearerD. A. (2016).
Observation as a method to enhance collective efficacy: An integrative review. Psychology of Sport and Exercise,
24, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2016.01.002.
11.
CarronA. V.BrawleyL. R.WidmeyerW. N. (1998). The measurement of cohesiveness in sport groups. In DudaJ. L. (Ed.), Advances in sport and exercise psychology measurement (pp. 213–226).
Fitness Information Technology.
12.
CarronA. V.WidmeyerW. N.BrawleyL. R. (1985).
The development of an instrument to assess cohesion in sport teams: The Group Environment Questionnaire. Journal of Sport Psychology,
7, 244–266.
13.
Cassep-BorgesV.BalbinottiM. A. A.TeodoroM. L. M. (2010). A proposal for instruments' adaptation. In PasqualiL. (Ed.), Psychological instrumentation: Fundamentals and practice (pp. 506–520).
Artmed.
14.
Chase, M. A., Feltz, D. L., & Lirgg, C. D. (2003). Sources of collective and individual efficacy of collegiate athletes. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1(2), 180--191. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2003.9671711
15.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002).
Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,
9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
16.
ChouC. P.BentlerP. M.SatorraA. (1991).
Scaled test statistics and robust standard errors for nonnormal data in covariance structure analysis: A Monte Carlo study. The British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology,
44(2), 347–357. https://doi.org/doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1991.tb00966.x
17.
Chow, G. M., & Feltz, D. L. (2007). Exploring new directions in collective efficacy and sport. In M. Beauchamp & M. Eys (Eds.), Group dynamics advances in sport and exercise psychology: Contemporary themes. London: Routledge.
18.
ComreyA. L.LeeH. B. (1992). A first course for identifying biased test items.
Erlbaum.
EysM. A.CarronA. V.BrayS. R. .BrawleyL. R. (2007).
Item wording and internal consistency of a measure of cohesion: The Group Environment Questionnaire. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology,
29, 395–402.
FieldA. P. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS (2nd ed.). Sage.
24.
FleissJ. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions (2nd ed.).
Wiley.
25.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39--50. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
26.
ForsythD. R. (2014). Group dynamics (6th ed.).
Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
27.
GreenleesI. A.NunnR. L.GraydonJ. K.MaynardI. W. (1999).
The relationship between collective efficacy and precompetitive affect in rugby players: Testing Bandura’s model of collective efficacy.Perceptual and Motor Skills,
89(2), 431–440. https://doi.org/doi:10.2466/pms.1999.89.2.431
28.
Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & Kuppelwieser, V. G. (2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research. European Business Review, 26(2), 106--121. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-10-2013-0128
29.
Hernández-NietoR. A. (2002). Contribuciones al análisis estadístico [Contributions to statistical analysis]. Universidad de Los Andes/IESINFO.
30.
HochiiY.MizunooM.NakayamaT.KannekoI.KitamuraK. (2012).
Relationship between collective efficacy and contextual performance among university athletes in Japan.Work (Reading, Massachusetts),
41(Suppl 1), 5759–5761. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-2012-0942-5759
HooperD.CoughlanJ.MullenM. R. (2008).
Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods,
6(1), 53–60. https://doi.org/10.21427/D7CF7R
33.
HuL. -T.BentlerP. M. (1999).
Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling,
6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
34.
JenkinsS. (2008).
Short book review: Self efficacy in sport: Research and strategies for working with athletes, teams and coaches. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching,
3(2), 293–295. https://doi.org/10.1260/174795408785100699
35.
JorgeM. R. (1998).
Transcultural adaptation of psychiatric instruments in mental health. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry,
25(5), 233–239.
36.
KawazuK.SugiyamaY.NakasugaT. (2012).
An investigation of the changing relationship between the collective efficacy and team performance of a sport team for different sporting events. Japanese Journal of Sport Psychology,
39(2), 153–167. https://doi.org/10.4146/jjspopsy.2012-1120
37.
KeshtanM. H.RamzaninezhadR.KordshooliS. S.PanahiP. M. (2010).
The relationship between collective efficacy and coaching behaviors in professional volleyball league of Iran clubs. World Journal of Sport Sciences,
3(1), 1–6.
38.
KeshtanM. H.ShahamatM. D.ShafieeS. (2009).
The relationship between collective efficacy, group cohesion and team performance in professional volleyball teams. Brazilian Journal of Biomotricity,
3(1), 31–39.
39.
KlineR. B. (2012). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling.
The Guilford Press.
40.
KozubS. A.McDonnellJ. F. (2000).
Exploring the relationship between cohesion and collective efficacy in rugby teams. Journal of Sport Behavior,
23(2), 120–129.
41.
Lopes VieiraJ. L.FerreiraL.CheuczukF.FloresP. P.da RochaF. F.do NascimentoJ. R. A.VieiraL. F.Nickenig VissociJ. R. (2015).
Impact of coach-athlete relationship on the collective efficacy of young volleyball players. Revista Brasileira de Cineantropometria e Desempenho Humano [Brazilian Journal of Kinanthropometry and Human Performance],
17(6), 650–660. https://doi.org/10.5007/1980-0037.2015v17n6p650
42.
Maddux, J. E. (1999). The collective construction of collective efficacy: Comment on Paskevich, Brawley, Dorsch, and Widmeyer (1999). Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 3(3), 223--226. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.3.3.223
43.
Magyar, T. M., Feltz, D. L., & Simpson, I. P. (2004). Individual and Crew Level Determinants of Collective Efficacy in Rowing. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 26(1), 136--153. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.26.1.136
44.
Marôco, J. (2010). Análise de Equações Estruturais: Fundamentos teóricos, Software e Aplicações (Structural equation analysis: theoretical foundations, Software and applications). P2o Pinheiro: Report Number.
45.
MarshH. W.EllisL. A.ParadaR. H.RichardsG.HeubeckB. G. (2005).
A short version of the Self Description Questionnaire II: Operationalizing criteria for short-form evaluation with new applications of confirmatory factor analyses. Psychological Assessment,
17(1), 81–102. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.17.1.81
46.
MartínezJ. R.GuillénF.FeltzD. L. (2011).
Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Collective Efficacy Questionnaire for Sports. Psicothema,
23(3), 503–509.
47.
McEwan, D., & Beauchamp, M. R. (2014). Teamwork in sport: A theoretical and integrative review. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 7(1), 229--250. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2014.932423
48.
McEwan, D. (2020). The effects of perceived teamwork on emergent states and satisfaction with performance among team sport athletes. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 9(1), 1--15. https://doi.org/10.1037/spy0000166
49.
MitraA.LanforkdS. (1999). Research methods in park, recreation and leisure services.
Sagamore Publishing.
50.
Moritz, S. E. (1998). The effect of task type on the relationship between efficacy beliefs and performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
51.
MyersN. D.FeltzD. L.ShortS. E. (2004).
Collective efficacy and team performance: A longitudinal study of collegiate football teams. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice,
8(2), 126–138. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.8.2.126
52.
MyersN. D.PaymentC. A.FeltzD. L. (2004).
Reciprocal relationships between collective efficacy and team performance in women’s ice hockey. Group Dynamics,
8(3), 182–195. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.8.3.182
53.
Nascimento, E. do, & Figueiredo, V. L. M. de. (2002). WISC-III e WAIS-III: alterações nas versões originais americanas decorrentes das adaptações para uso no Brasil. Psicologia: Reflexão e CrԴica [WISC-III and WAIS-III: changes in the original American versions resulting from adaptations for use in Brazil. Psychology: Reflection and Criticism], 15(3), 603?612. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0102-79722002000300014
54.
Nascimento-JuniorJ. R. A. D.FortesL. D. S.FreireG. L. M.OliveiraD. V. D.FioreseL.CroninL. D. (2019).
Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Portuguese Version of the Life Skills Scale for Sport. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science,
0(0), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367x.2019.1647208
55.
Nascimento-Junior, J. R. A. do, Fortes, L. de S., Freire, G. L. M., Oliveira, D. V. de, Fiorese, L., & Cronin, L. D. (2020). Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Properties of the Portuguese Version of the Life Skills Scale for Sport. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 24(1), 11--24. https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367X.2019.1647208
56.
Nascimento JuniorJ. R. A. D.VieiraL. F.RosadoA. F. B.SerpaS. (2012).
Validation of the Group Environment Questionnaire (GEQ) for the Portuguese language. Journal of Physical Education,
18(4), 770–782. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1980-65742012000400015
57.
NunnallyJ. C. B.IraH. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.).
McGraw-Hill.
58.
ÖncüE.FeltzD. L.LirggC. D.GürbüzB. (2018).
The examination of the psychometric properties of the turkish collective efficacy questionnaire for sports. Acta Gymnica,
48(1), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.5507/ag.2018.005
59.
Papaioannou, A. G., Machaira, E., & Theano, V. (2013). Fifteen years of publishing in English language journals of sport and exercise psychology: Authors? proficiency in English and editorial boards make a difference. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11(1), 1--10. doi:10.1080/1612197X.2013.753726
60.
PaskevichD. M.BrawleyL. R.DorschK. D.WidmeyerW. N. (1999).
Relationship between collective efficacy and team cohesion: Conceptual and measurement issues. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice,
3(3), 210–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.3.3.210
Santi, G., Bruton, A., Wadey, R., Pietrantoni, L., & Mellalieu, S. (2019). Psychometric properties of an Italian version of the Collective Efficacy Questionnaire for Sports. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 19(3), 395--412.s://doi. httporg/10.1080/1612197X.2019.1674900
63.
ShortS. E.SullivanP.FeltzD. (2005).
Development and preliminary validation of the Collective Efficacy Questionnaire for sports. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science,
9(3), 181–202. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327841mpee0903_3
64.
Sturm, R., & Short, S. E. (2004). The relationships among self-efficacy, team efficacy, and team performance in baseball. Unpublished manuscript.
65.
WeirJ. P. (2005).
Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research,
19(1), 231–240.
66.
WidmeyerW. N.BrawleyL. R.CarronA. V. (1985). The measurement of cohesion in sports: The Group Environment Questionnaire.
Sports Dynamics.
67.
ZaccaroS. J.BlairV.PetersonC.ZazanisM. (1995). Collective efficacy. In MadduxJ. E. (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application (pp. 305–328).
Plenum.
