Evaluating Validity and Test-Retest Reliability in Four Drive for Muscularity Questionnaires

D. Tod; Todd G. Morrison; Christian Edwards

doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2012.02.001

Evaluating Validity and Test-Retest Reliability in Four Drive for Muscularity Questionnaires

D. Tod, Todd G. Morrison, Christian Edwards

Department of Psychology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The current study assessed relationships among four commonly used drive for muscularity questionnaires, along with their 7 and 14 day test–retest reliability. Sample 1 was comprised of young British adult males (N = 272; MAGE = 20.3) who completed the questionnaires once. Sample 2, a group of young British adult males (N = 54, MAGE = 19.3), completed the questionnaires three times spaced 7 and 14 days apart. Correlations among Sample 1 ranged from .20 to .82 providing evidence for concurrent and discriminant validities. Evidence for test–retest reliability emerged with intraclass correlations ranging from .78 to .95 (p < .001) and generally nonsignificant t-tests (p > .05). Overall, the data support the psychometric properties of the drive for muscularity inventories; however, the shared variance (35–67%) hints that refinement is possible.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	425-428
Journal	Body Image
Volume	9
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2012.02.001
Publication status	Published - Jun 2012

Keywords

Drive for muscularity
Body image
Psychometrics
Concurrent validity
Discriminant validity
Test–retest reliability

Access to Document

10.1016/j.bodyim.2012.02.001

Permanent link

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{bbbf674ae04540c08f1b7fbeaa5b24d2,

title = "Evaluating Validity and Test-Retest Reliability in Four Drive for Muscularity Questionnaires",

abstract = "The current study assessed relationships among four commonly used drive for muscularity questionnaires, along with their 7 and 14 day test–retest reliability. Sample 1 was comprised of young British adult males (N = 272; MAGE = 20.3) who completed the questionnaires once. Sample 2, a group of young British adult males (N = 54, MAGE = 19.3), completed the questionnaires three times spaced 7 and 14 days apart. Correlations among Sample 1 ranged from .20 to .82 providing evidence for concurrent and discriminant validities. Evidence for test–retest reliability emerged with intraclass correlations ranging from .78 to .95 (p < .001) and generally nonsignificant t-tests (p > .05). Overall, the data support the psychometric properties of the drive for muscularity inventories; however, the shared variance (35–67%) hints that refinement is possible.",

keywords = "Drive for muscularity, Body image, Psychometrics, Concurrent validity, Discriminant validity, Test–retest reliability",

author = "D. Tod and Morrison, {Todd G.} and Christian Edwards",

year = "2012",

month = jun,

doi = "10.1016/j.bodyim.2012.02.001",

language = "English",

volume = "9",

pages = "425--428",

journal = "Body Image",

issn = "1873-6807",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluating Validity and Test-Retest Reliability in Four Drive for Muscularity Questionnaires

AU - Tod, D.

AU - Morrison, Todd G.

AU - Edwards, Christian

PY - 2012/6

Y1 - 2012/6

N2 - The current study assessed relationships among four commonly used drive for muscularity questionnaires, along with their 7 and 14 day test–retest reliability. Sample 1 was comprised of young British adult males (N = 272; MAGE = 20.3) who completed the questionnaires once. Sample 2, a group of young British adult males (N = 54, MAGE = 19.3), completed the questionnaires three times spaced 7 and 14 days apart. Correlations among Sample 1 ranged from .20 to .82 providing evidence for concurrent and discriminant validities. Evidence for test–retest reliability emerged with intraclass correlations ranging from .78 to .95 (p < .001) and generally nonsignificant t-tests (p > .05). Overall, the data support the psychometric properties of the drive for muscularity inventories; however, the shared variance (35–67%) hints that refinement is possible.

AB - The current study assessed relationships among four commonly used drive for muscularity questionnaires, along with their 7 and 14 day test–retest reliability. Sample 1 was comprised of young British adult males (N = 272; MAGE = 20.3) who completed the questionnaires once. Sample 2, a group of young British adult males (N = 54, MAGE = 19.3), completed the questionnaires three times spaced 7 and 14 days apart. Correlations among Sample 1 ranged from .20 to .82 providing evidence for concurrent and discriminant validities. Evidence for test–retest reliability emerged with intraclass correlations ranging from .78 to .95 (p < .001) and generally nonsignificant t-tests (p > .05). Overall, the data support the psychometric properties of the drive for muscularity inventories; however, the shared variance (35–67%) hints that refinement is possible.

KW - Drive for muscularity

KW - Body image

KW - Psychometrics

KW - Concurrent validity

KW - Discriminant validity

KW - Test–retest reliability

UR - http://hdl.handle.net/2160/8781

U2 - 10.1016/j.bodyim.2012.02.001

DO - 10.1016/j.bodyim.2012.02.001

M3 - Article

C2 - 22398333

SN - 1873-6807

VL - 9

SP - 425

EP - 428

JO - Body Image

JF - Body Image

IS - 3

ER -

Evaluating Validity and Test-Retest Reliability in Four Drive for Muscularity Questionnaires

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Permanent link

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this