FACTORIAL STRUCTURE OF ROSENBERG’S SELF-ESTEEM SCALE AMONG INJURED MALE RUGBY PLAYERS IN THE KENYA CUP COMPETITION

Authors

  • Anthony Muchiri Department of Health Promotion and Sport Science, School of Public Health, Biomedical Sciences and Technology, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kakamega, Kenya
  • Edwin K. Wamukoya Department of Health Promotion and Sport Science, School of Public Health, Biomedical Sciences and Technology, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kakamega, Kenya
  • Donald Kokonya Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kakamega, Kenya

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46827/ejpe.v6i12.3681

Keywords:

self-esteem, rugby players, model, structural equation modelling, Kenya Cup

Abstract

Four different confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) models, including CFAs with correlated traits, uniqueness’s, and methods, were employed to test the factorial structure of Rosenberg’s (1965) self-esteem scale in a sample of injured male rugby players in the Kenya cup competition. The outcome of the factorial analysis to some extent concurs with studies conducted earlier. These finding depict that (a) there exists a single global self-esteem factor underlying responses to Rosenberg scale; (b) method effects associated with item wording exist; and (c) the method effects were associated primarily with positively, rather than negatively, worded items. The sample consisted of 105 injured male rugby players the average age was 21.7±5.3 years, and the majority 23.8% were 20 years old. Majority 67.6% (n=71) of the respondents were forwards, while 32.4% (n=34) were backs. 82.9% were not capped with the national team while 11.4% (n=12) weighed 70kgs. The research hypothesized a four-factor structure of the RSES utilizing CFA with the SPSS-AMOS 16. The first model outcome was, (X2=132.2 df=35 CFI=0.561 NFI=0.463 RMSEA=0.163 SRMR=0.1373 AIC=192.2. The second model (X2=77.609 df=27 CFI=0.748 NFI=0.685 RMSEA=0.134 SRMR=0.1197 AIC=153.609). The third model was a Uni-dimensional positive wording X2=58.378 df=25 CFI=0.834 NFI=0.763 RMSEA=0.113 SRMR=0.0888 AIC=138.378. Finally, a model was run on Positive and Negative wording correlated, the outcomes (X2=79.68 df=34 CFI=0.748 NFI=0.685 RMSEA=0.114 SRMR=0.1151 AIC=121.68). Every model, including the single-factor model (Model 1), fits data adequately. However, the function of a single theoretical dimension (GSE) was contaminated by method effects. Our results show that method effects need to be taken into account to obtain a close model fit (i.e., RMSEA < 0.05).

Article visualizations:

Hit counter

Author Biographies

  • Anthony Muchiri, Department of Health Promotion and Sport Science, School of Public Health, Biomedical Sciences and Technology, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kakamega, Kenya
    Anthony Muchiri is a researcher of the department of health promotion and sports science. His research interests are in sports sciences especially performance related and sports psychology.
  • Edwin K. Wamukoya, Department of Health Promotion and Sport Science, School of Public Health, Biomedical Sciences and Technology, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kakamega, Kenya
    Edwin Kadima Wamukoya is senior professor and the current dean school of public health and biomedical sciences Masinde Muliro university, he has a diverse experience in research and his current interests are in sports science and performance.
  • Donald Kokonya, Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kakamega, Kenya
    Donald Kokonya is a senior lecturer and the current dean of the school of medicine his current researches interests are in the areas of psychiatry, behavioral science and sports science.

References

Marsh, H. M. (1993). Academic self-concept: Theory, measurement, and research. In J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological

Marsh, H. M. (1996). Positive and negative global self-esteem: A substantial meaningful distinction or artifactors? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 810–819.

Marsh, H. W. (1986). The bias of negatively worded items in rating scales for young children: A cognitive- developmental phenomenon. Developmental Psychology, 22, 37–49.

Mruk, J. C. (1999). Self-esteem: Research, theory, and practice (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.

Pelham, B. W., & Swann, W. B. (1989). From self-conception to self-worth: On the sources and structure of global self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 672–680

Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books.

Rosenberg, M., Schoenbach, C., Schooler, C., & Rosenberg, F. (1995). American Sociological Review, 60, 141–156

Patrick W. C. Lau, Mike W. L. Cheung & Lynda Ransdell (2007) Sports identity and sport participation: A cultural comparison between Collective and Individualistic Societies, International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 5:1, 66-81, DOI: 10.1080/1612197X.2008.9671813.

Steiger J. H. (2007). Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling. Pers Indiv Differ. 2007;42(5): 893-898.

Yu, C. Y. (2002). Evaluating Cutoff Criteria of Model Fit Indices for Latent Variable Models with Binary and Continuous Outcomes [doctoral dissertation]. Los Angeles, CA: University of California.

Vergeer, I. (2006). Exploring the mental representation of athletic injury: A longitudinal case study. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7(1), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2005.07.003

Walker, N., & Thatcher, J. (2011). The emotional response to athletic injury: Re-injury anxiety. In J. Thatcher, M. Jones, & D. Lavallee (Eds.), Coping and emotion in sport (2nd ed., pp. 236-260). New York, NY: Routledge.

Downloads

Published

2021-04-13

Issue

Section

Articles