Content uploaded by Renata Baric
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Renata Baric on Jan 12, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Psychometric Properties of the Croatian Version of Task and Ego Orientation in Sport
Questionnaire (TEOSQ)
Barić, Renata, M.Sc.
Smiljka Horga, Full Professor
Faculty of Kinesiology, Zagreb, Croatia
Correspondence to:
Barić Renata, M. Sc. Prof. Smiljka Horga
Faculty of Kinesiology Faculty of Kinesiology
Kinesiological Psychology Kinesiological Psychology
Horvaćanski zavoj 15 Horvaćanski zavoj 15
10000 Zagreb 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
Croatia
Tel. 00385 1 3658 741 Tel. 00385 1 3658 737
e-mail: rjurinic@kif.hr e-mail: shorga@kif.hr
1
Psychometric Properties of the Croatian Version of Task and Ego Orientation in Sport
Questionnaire (TEOSQ)
The purpose of this study was to examine selected psychometric properties of the
Croatian version of Task and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire in order to extent the
construct validation of this sport motivation instrument. The present study utilized an
exploratory factor analytic approach to determine a factor structure of Croatian version of
TEOSQ and quasi-confirmatory factor analytic approach to evaluate the theoretical two-
factor structure of original TEOSQ scores and to examine the assumption of structure
invariance across two different sports. 388 young male Croatian athletes from 17 football and
17 handball teams participated in this study. The results show that the Croatian version of
TEOSQ confirmed the original two-factor solution (task, ego). Reliability coefficients for the
both dimensions indicated adequate reliability. The results are discussed with regard to
accurate assessment of motivational constructs and a need for a valid and reliable instrument
that can be used within the national sport-specific environment.
Key Words: goal orientation, TEOSQ, factor analysis (PCA), football, handball
2
Psychometric Properties of the Croatian Version of Task and Ego Orientation in Sport
Questionnaire (TEOSQ)
Introduction
Contemporary cognitive research on motivation directs researchers to understand
involvement and persistence in sport activity, intensity of sport participation, and sport
performance as goal oriented. The achievement goal theory is the best framework for
investigating this field due to its basic assumption that the individual is an intentional, goal-
directed person who operates in rational manner. His/her decision-making-processes,
feelings, thoughts and behavior are strongly guided by his/her intention to accomplish certain
goals in achievement context, i.e. sport. The main goal of action in achievement goal theory
is assumed to be the demonstration of competence (Nicholls, 1992; Roberts, Treasure, &
Balague, 1998). According to this, the perception of ability becomes the central variable. An
athlete adopts the goal that most closely reflects his/her cognitive belief about what is
required to maximize achievement in a particular sport context. In other words, athletes make
an ‘implicit theory’ of what achievement means to them in a particular sport situation or task,
and focus on the achievement goals to meet their needs and satisfy their implicit theory.
The social-cognitive approach to achievement motivation presumes two basic
perspectives of modeling achievement goals. At the same time, these perspectives are the
criteria by which an individual assesses success in achievement context (Duda, 1992;
Nicholls, 1992; Roberts, 1993). These achievement goals are mutually contrasted as the task
versus the ego orientation. Whether a person is in the state of task or ego involvement in the
achievement context of sport activity depends on his/her dispositional orientation (Duda,
1993; Roberts, 2001). Task and ego goal orientations are considered as orthogonal
dimensions (Duda, 2001) and a person can be high or low in either or both. A highly task-
oriented athlete regards his/her success in sport environment as personal improvement in
skills and mastery through invested effort. The athlete is oriented toward learning and
perfecting a task. He/she evaluates his/her performance according to the self-referenced
criterion, according to the previous state of skill and accomplished improvement. An ego-
oriented athlete tends to assess level of his/her competence with reference to performance of
others – he/she is successful only when his/her performance is better than theirs. Only then
the athlete can experience success (normative based criteria). These athletes are oriented
3
toward exceeding others and demonstrating better ability. If an athlete is task oriented, then
the concept of ability is undifferentiated. The perception of ability or competing others is not
as relevant as is the demonstration of mastery (Nicholls, 1992). This can explain why athletes
persist in activity also in the case of failure – their achievement behavior is adaptive when
they exert effort and, select challenging tasks. In other words, they are intrinsically motivated
for participation when trying to accomplish improvement by hard work and practicing. On
the other hand, if the goal orientation of an athlete is ego involved, the conception of ability is
differentiated. The ability of a person to differentiate the constructs of ability from effort, task
difficulty and luck occurs by the age of 12 (Harwood & Swain, 2000). It means that
perceived ability is the most relevant; an athlete tries to demonstrate normative ability, fares
in comparison to others, trying to outplay them or displaying equal performance with less
effort. If, in this case, the perception of ability is low, then the individual will realize that
his/her ability cannot be demonstrated and will manifest maladaptive achievement behaviors
(Roberts et al., 1998). These include avoiding realistic challenges, not exerting effort,
reducing persistence in the face of difficulty or dropping out from the activity. Also, an
athlete might not exert effort, making in this way a good excuse for failure, or he/she might
use some self-defensive mechanisms (for example, rationalization or projection). On the
other hand, these behaviors may be viewed as adaptive from the athlete’s perspective because
the lack of ability is disguised by these behaviors. However, they are considered as
maladaptive from the perspective of long-term achievement toward an athlete strive in sport
context. As task and ego goal orientations are inner, dispositional tendencies regarding
different ways of processing activity (Duda, 2001), it can be presumed that anyone wants
his/her ability to be recognized by others. Also, everyone wants to learn new things, but the
difference is in how one evaluates his/her own goals and to which extent he/she wants to
sacrifice one goal for the other. Despite the theoretical presumption about the stability of the
goal orientations, they can be considered as ‘cognitive schemas’ that can be remodelled to a
certain degree as person processes information about particular task (Roberts, 2001) or in a
particular situation. It can be said that a person is generally either task or ego oriented, but it
is transformable, depending of what meaning the achievement in a particular task might have
for a person.
Some new evidences label that three forms of goal orientation exist in sport (Harwood,
Hardy & Swain, 2000; Harwood & Swain, 2000). These are pure task involvement in which,
as explained before, achievement is conceived merely as effort, hard work and learning,
without direct or observable competence outcome. The second is self-referenced ego
4
involvement in which athletes are focused on demonstration of ability associated with the
level of sport skills, irrespective of the skills of others. The third is norm-referenced ego
involvement, i.e. motivational state that corresponds to previously described ego goal
orientation, achievement is accomplished through demonstration of ability that is better than
others. In general, task and ego goal orientations exist and are relevant to the achievement
behavior of individuals in sport. It is of high importance to be aware of individual differences
in this segment of motivation.
Measures of goal orientations in sport
In attempt to study goal orientations in sport and to measure them reliably and validly
sport psychology researchers developed questionnaires that are assumed to measure
dichotomous goal orientations mostly based on achievement goal theory. Two major
measures of dispositional goal orientations in sport psychology literature are Task and Ego
Orientation in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ) (Duda, Chi, Newton, Walling, & Cately, 1995)
and Perception of Success Questionnaire (POSQ) (Roberts, Treasure, & Balague, 1998). Both
instruments assess achievement goal orientation that affect athlete’s motivation in sport, more
precisely, “these measures are developed to assess how individuals typically define success in
sport” (Duda, 1993, p 132). POSQ consists of two subscales: competitive and mastery goals,
that have demonstrated acceptable validity and reliability and has been widely used in sport
context. TEOSQ is the most commonly used measure of goal orientation; it consists of two
subscales, namely task and ego. Up to date it has been translated to many languages and over
more than 100 published studies have employed TEOSQ in different samples involving
various sports, competitive levels, and nationalities.
On the other hand, some authors measured goal orientation in sport specific situation,
believing that particular sport context can have impact on actual goal orientation, regardless
of its basic dispositional definition.
In the process of adopting the original task and ego constructs and their commonly used
measure within particular sport environment one should have to take into account particular
influences that could have an impact on the measurement issues such as language or cultural
diversity. Despite the fact that factorial stability and structure invariance were widely
confirmed, some authors (i.e. Li, Vongjaturapat, & Harmer, 1995) cited some cultural
differences that appear in the interpretation of factor item content. Also, despite that task and
ego constructs are theorized to be orthogonal, some investigations showed that they are
lightly, positively correlated (Kim & Gill, 1997). Therefore, with some reason, every new
5
application of the questionnaire is a contribution to its validation. The existence of valid and
reliable scale for the measurement of goal orientation provides a better understanding of
(Croatian) athletes’ achievement motivation, and may serve as an initial base for identifying
potential shortcomings or limitations in establishing goals. Also, this information could be
very useful segment in process of psychological preparation in sport, i.e. in establishing
necessary changes and directions toward an athlete should strive in the process of his/her
desired sport career development.
To date a few investigations of athletes’ goal orientation were performed on population of
Croatian athletes. The purpose of this study was to examine the factor structure of the
Croatian version of Task and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire using confirmatory
factor analytic procedure, in order to extent the construct validation of this sport motivation
instrument.
Methods
Participants
A total of 388 young male Croatian athletes (M=15.6 years, SD=1.23 years)
volunteered to participate in this study. The sample was comprised of 17 junior, male
football and 17 handball teams from all over Croatia, i.e. of 206 football players and 182
handball players. All players competed on national level.
All participants were members of their sport teams at least six months and trained in their
clubs three, four or five times per week.
Assessment and procedure
All players were asked to complete the Croatian version of Task and Ego Orientation
in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ; Duda et. al., 1995).
The original Task and Ego Orientation is Sport Questionnaire (Duda et. al. ,1995) comprises
of two goal orientation dimensions, which reflect the task and ego goal constructs suggested
by achievement goal theory (Nicholls, 1992). Many studies have consistently supported its
construct validity and reliability (Duda, 2001). In some recent investigations who used
original or translated version of TEOSQ reliability coefficients from 0.74 to 0.81 and from
0.86 to 0.89 were reported for the Task and Ego orientation subscales, respectively (Kim,
Williams, & Gill, 200; Newton & Duda, 1999; Xiang and Lee, 2002). Both subscales have
6
demonstrated predictive utility with respect to variety of factors representing motivational
processes operating within sport context.
The instrument was translated in Croatian following three-steps methodology
(Vallerand, 1989): the back translation technique; examination of the translated version by
the experts in the field and application in a pilot study. The questionnaire was translated by
one of the authors and one English and Croatian language expert with long practice in the
field of kinesiology. Then the other bilingual speaker translated it back to English. Both
versions were examined by two researches from the field of sport psychology, familiar with
the publications and theories about motivation in sport. The final form of the Croatian version
of the TEOSQ was tested in a pilot study with 246 Croatian children engaged in track-and-
field training either in school or in a sports club environment. The same version was used in
the present study (included in appendix). As mentioned before, TEOSQ is comprised of two
composite scales; the task subscale, that is composed of 7 items (“ ..I learn a new skill and it
makes me want to practice more”) and the ego subscale, that is composed of 6 items (“I can
do better than my friends”). The stem ‘I feel most successful in football/handball when...’
preceded each item. The participants responded using the 5-point Likert scale (1 - strongly
disagree, 5 - strongly agree).
All the participants filled the questionnaires voluntarily and before the measuring the
informed consent of club’s management and coaches’ were received. Coaches also informed
parents before the measuring. The data were collected prior or after a training session, in a
group setting. The participants were asked to respond to TEOSQ with regard to their
participation in their team in the current competitive season.
Each athlete had a right to terminate participation in the study at any time and anonymity and
confidentiality of athletes’ responses was guaranteed.
Data analyses
The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (ver.
11.0). The present study utilized a quasi-confirmatory principal components factor analytic
approach to evaluate the theoretical two-factor structure of original TEOSQ scores and to
examine the assumption of structure invariance across two different sports. On the other
words, factor structure of Croatian version of TEOSQ was investigated. The Kaiser-Guttman
criterion were used to determine the number of factors.
7
Results
To examine psychometric properties of adequacy of correlation matrix necessary for
factor analysis, Bartlett and Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) tests were performed (Table 1).
The obtained results show significant value of Bartlett test for each sample separately and
altogether. The value of KMO test are high. According to these results it can be concluded
that more than 80% of correlations are determined with common factors and that the matrices
are suitable for factorisation.
Table 1
Information about latent structure of athletes’ goal orientation assessed by the
Croatian version of TEOSQ is fundamental for evaluation of its construct validity. To be able
to quantify variations in goal structure system of Croatian athletes with this instrument, it is
necessary to obtain satisfactory congruence of its factor structure with the factor structure of
the original TEOSQ, already widely known and confirmed on different samples, interpretable
and invariant to a high degree. To test these, the quasi-confirmatory principal component
factor analyses were performed, for each sport separately, by fixing the number of factors to
2 in advance. Authors decided to test factor structure in each sport separately, trying to
confirm stability of expected two-factor solution.
Two factors with eigenvalues higher than 1.0 emerged in both sports, with exactly the same
factor structures as in the original version of the questionnaire (Duda et. al., 1995). On the
other words, each factor was comprised of same 6 (ego) and 7 (task) items as it was expected
upon the original version of TEOSQ. Those two factors explained 60.84% (handball) and
60.54 % (football) of variance.
Table 2
The result of factor analyses of the 13-item TEOSQ version showed simple structure,
meaning that every single item was correlated with only one factor, with the minimum
loading obtained of 0.51 (Table 2).
Descriptive parameters, internal consistency and inter-factor correlation for the
Croatian version of TEOSQ were calculated and presented in Table 3.
8
Table 3
Cronbach's
α
coefficients show that 2 scales of the Croatian version of TEOSQ are
highly reliable. If compared to the reliability coefficients from the original version (task .83,
ego .78) (Duda et. al., 1995), to the
α
coefficients obtained in this investigation (0.80 to 0.86)
it may be said that Croatian version of TEOSQ is of about the same reliability. In general,
the results obtained in the present study confirmed the validity and reliability of TEOSQ.
According to the descriptive parameters it is obvious that both the handball players
and the football players are, in general, more task than ego oriented and that they do not
differ much in their estimations of what is the main prerequisite to experience personal
success in their sport.
Inter-factor correlations confirm that task and ego dimensions are orthogonal, that is,
congruent with the presumptions of achievement goal theory from which the goal orientation
construct has been derived (Nicholls, 1992).
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine the psychometric characteristics of the
Croatian version of TEOSQ. The authors’ motivation for the translation and adoption of this
instrument stemmed from the need for such an inventory since no similar instrument in the
Croatian language assesses this motivation concept in sport.
Some psychometric properties of translated measure of goal orientation were
examined. The cross cultural robustness of the factor structure of translated version of
TEOSQ was tested. Results of quasi-confirmative factor analysis confirmed two-factor model
of the TEOSQ. It is supported also by reliability of two dimensions (scales) of goal
orientations. Also, task and ego subscales proved to be internally consistent. The obtained
values of Cronbach's
α
coefficients are similar to those obtained with the original
questionnaire, despite the fact that the translated versions of TEOSQ sometimes may lose
something of its reliability, as reported in several studies (for example, Kim et al., 2003).
Correlation coefficients between these two factors were not significant, what is congruent
with the assumptions of the goal achievement theory (Nicholls, 1992; Duda, 2001) and
empirical results obtained in numerous investigations up to date. Task and ego goal
orientations are considered to be orthogonal dimensions, one may be high or low on each
9
dimensions, or high on first, low on second or vice versa, i.e. it is possible to obtain four
different profiles of goal orientation in athletes.
For the sport practice, the promising aspect of this investigation is the fact that
Croatian young, male athletes from team sports are dominantly task oriented, that is
considered as more desirable pattern of determining sport goals. Namely, one of the most
prominent problems related to athletes of this age is dropping out from sport (Roberts, 1993).
It begins as athletes enter in puberty and this increased risk continues up until the age of 16.
Athletes are usually confronted with a major overlap between their academic and athletic
development (Wylleman, 2005), they also develop other non-sport interests and those reason
combine with factors related to team’s environment. If athlete’s primary goals are mastery of
sport skills, learning and improving through effort invested (task goal orientation), it is more
likely, according to achievement goal theory, that his/her intrinsic motivation is higher
(Duda, 2001; Treasure, 2001). On the other hand if an athlete’s primary goals are winning,
beating others, results and medals (ego goal orientation), there is much more risk for
developing extrinsic motivation pattern. It may have some negative consequences, as for
example, maladaptive responses or diminishing motivation, especially when results and
winning fail and it is especially the case for athletes with lower perceived competence. These
effects may be summarized resulting with high drop out risk or even abandoning sports. Also,
diminished motivation may be a result of too much pressure to win, low level of team’s
cooperation or bad coach-athlete relationship. The initial idea for participating in any sport
activity is to have fun or to play. This may be viewed through individual goal perspectives. It
may be easier to have fun in environment that support cooperation, mastering and learning
because these goals and their limits can be internally controlled from a particular team, i.e.
from, in this case, task oriented athletes. On the other hand, if someone’s fun and satisfaction
depend also on others, as are team-mates who need to be outplayed, opponents or referees,
there is much more risk for failure and negative emotions, and fun may not be realized.
Coaches who work with children and youth should be aware of advantages of task goal
orientation. They should support and direct athletes toward those kind of goals creating
mastery motivational climate in their teams, i.e. formulating their demands and expectations
about success more toward learning and improving because it can be considered as a right,
although a bit slower, way to achieve results and wins without pressure.
10
Conclusions
According to the goal achievement theory, individuals differ in their proneness to task
or ego involvement. As variations in goal perspective are manifested also at the dispositional
level, it is important to develop accurate measure of such a motivation construct. The Task
and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire (TEOSQ) is a widely used measure of goal
orientation, its validity and reliability were supported in many studies. This article provides
data on the adaptation of goal orientation instrument in a particular sport setting. The results
show that TEOSQ translated into the Croatian language and used within the national sport-
specific environment is also a valid and reliable instrument. It is suitable for use within sport
context with young, as well as with experienced athletes. The Croatian version of TEOSQ
confirmed the original two-factor solution. Undoubtedly, further validation of the instrument
is welcomed, especially in examination of (co)relation of this TEOSQ version with other
instruments derived from the pool of inventories for assessing motivation in sport context.
The problem is that no other instrument is translated and validated for use with the Croatian
athletes, it is the task that should be completed in the future. It can be concluded that this
study is a contribution to validation of TEOSQ that proved again as a valid and reliable
instrument which enables accurate assessment and, consequently, better understanding of
goal orientation in sport. Goal orientation of Croatian football and handball athletes are more
task than ego oriented, that is considered as more desirable orientation for formulating
achievement goals in sport.
11
References
Barić, R. (2004). Motivational climate in sport. (Unpublished Master thesis). Ljubljana: Faculty of Arts.
Barić, R., Cecić-Erpič, S., & Babić, V. (2002). Intrinsic motivation and goal orientation in track-and- field
children. Kinesiology, 34 (1), 50-60.
Duda, J.L, Chi, L., Newton, M., Walling, M.D., & Catley, D. (1995). Task and ego orientation and
intrinsic motivation in sport. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, 40-63.
Duda, J.L. (1992). Motivation in sport settings: a goal perspective approach. In: G.C. Roberts (Ed.),
Motivation in Sport and Exercise (pp. 57-93). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers.
Duda, J.L. (1993). Goals: a social-cognitive approach to the study of achievement motivation. In: R.N.
Singer, M. Muhphey, & L.K. Tennant (Eds.), Handbook of Research in Sport Psychology (pp. 421-
435). New York: Macmillian Publ. Company.
Duda, J.L. (2001). Achievement goal research in sport: pushing boundaries and clarifying some
misunderstandings. In: G.C.Roberts (Ed.), Advances in Motivation in Sport and Exercise (pp. 129-
183). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers.
Harwood, C., Hardy, L., & Swain, A. (2000). Achievement goals in sport: a critique of conceptual and
measurement issues. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 22: 235-255.
Harwood, C., & Swain, A. (2002). The development and activation of achievement goals within tennis: a
player, parent and coach intervention. The Sport Psychologist, 16, 111-137.
Kim, B.J., Williams, L., & Gill, D. (2003). A cross-cultural study of achievement orientation and intrinsic
motivation in young USA and Korean athletes. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 34, 168-
184.
Chi, L., Harmer, P., Li, F., & Vongjaturapat, N. (1996). Cross-cultural validation of the task and ego orientation in sport
questionnaire. Journal of Sport and Exercise psychology, 18 (4), 392-407..
Newton, M., & Duda, J.L. (1999). The interaction of motivational climate, dispositional goal orientations
and perceived ability in prediction indices of motivation. International Journal of Sport Psychology,
30, 63-82.
Nicholls, J.G. (1992). The general and the specific in the development and expression of achievement
motivation. In: G.C. Roberts (Ed.), Motivation in Sport and Exercise (pp. 31-57). Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics Publishers.
Roberts, G.C. (1993). Motivation in sport: understanding and enhancing the motivation and achievement
of children. In: R.N. Singer, M. Muhphey, & L.K. Tennant (Eds.), Handbook of Research in Sport
Psychology (pp. 517-586). New York: Macmillian Publ. Company.
Roberts, G.C. (2001). Understanding the dynamics of motivation in physical activity: the influence of
achievement goals on motivational processes. In: G.C. Roberts (Ed.), Advances in Motivation in Sport
and Exercise (pp.1-51). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers.
Roberts, G.C., Treasure, D.C., & Balague, G. (1998). Achievement goals in sport: the development and
validation of the perception of success questionnaire. Journal of Sport Sciences, 16, 337-347.
Thill, E.E. & Brunel, P. (1995). Ego-involvement and task-involvement: Related conceptions of ability,
effort, and learning strategies among soccer players. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26,
81-97.
12
TABLE I
Bartlett and Kaiser – Meyer – Olkin, TEOSQ-Croatian version; football (n=206), handball (n=192)
football handball total
χ2
df
Sig.
KMO
943.544
78
0.000
.839
847.964
78
0.000
.811
1724.118
78
0.000
.851
13
TABLE II
Factor structure of the Croatian version of TEOSQ (principal components, varimax)
QUASI-CONFIRMATORY FA
football handball
1
2
1
2
T1
.82
T7
.79
T5
.81
T4
.78
T3
.77
T1
.78
T5
.76
T3
.72
T7
.74
T2
.71
T6
.64
T5
.68
T2
.62
T6
.58
E3
.77
E3
.78
E1
.74
E4
.76
E5
.73
E5
.71
E2
.69
E6
.70
E6
.66
E2
.69
E4
.64
E1
.66
Eg
3.92
2.97
Eg
3.83
3.04
V
30.2
22.9
29.4
23.4
Total
60.84%
60.54%
Legend: Eg. - eigenvalue,
V - % of variance explained,
Total - % of total variance explained
T1-T7, E1-E6 – questionnaire items
14
TABLE III
Descriptive parameters, Cronbach's alphas and inter-factor correlations, TEOSQ - Croatian version;
football (n=206), handball (n=192)
Mean (SD) Cronbach's alpha Factor correlation
TASK
Factor football handball total football handball total football handball total
TASK 4.20 (0.703) 4.13 (0.694) 4.17 (0.699) 0.80 0.81 0.85
EGO 2.99 (0.907) 2.64 (0.907) 2.82 (0.923) 0.86 0.84 0.81 .05 -.08 .00
15
16
17