体育管理实证研究中的量表应用:常见问题与改进建议  

Scale Application of Empirical Research in Sport Management:Common Issues and Suggestions

作　　者：骆雷 刘炜[1] 张孟艳 李汉熙 LUO Lei;LIU Wei;ZHANG Mengyan;LI Hanxi(School of Economics and Management,Shanghai University of Sport,Shanghai 200438,China)

机构地区：[1]上海体育学院经济管理学院,上海200438

出　　处：《上海体育学院学报》2021年第11期61-70,共10页Journal of Shanghai University of Sport

基　　金：上海市浦江人才计划(2020PJC098)。

摘　　要：以国内体育管理实证研究文献中的量表应用为研究对象,基于对2010—2020年发表的348篇文献样本的梳理,分析体育管理实证研究领域量表应用中的常见问题并提出改进建议。存在的问题主要体现为:①混淆单维度、多维度量表与问卷的差异;②不能准确理解组合信度与α系数在量表信度评价中的作用;③忽视"信度引入"问题;④内容效度与结构效度评价的科学性不足;⑤忽视共同方法变异对量表效度的影响;⑥反映性指标与形成性指标的误用;⑦混淆量表的观测指标与评价指标。建议:①量表内部一致性检验应考虑使用组合信度;②"信度引入"时应重新检验量表信度;③内容效度评价建议选用内容效度指数;④国外成熟量表的本土化应考量研究情境的适切性;⑤观测指标的选取应考虑反映性指标与形成性指标的差异;⑥应检验和控制共同方法变异情况;⑦不宜运用量表方法对评价对象进行评价。The purpose of this study was to discuss common issues of scale application in sport management empirical research fields.Based on analysis of 348 literature samples from 2010 to 2020,these common issues are as follows:misunderstanding the difference between single dimension scale,multi-dimension scale and questionnaire,or the function of composite reliability and Cronbach'sα;neglecting reliability introduction;assessing content validity and construct validity inappropriately;neglecting common method variance(CMV);misapplying the reflective and informative indicators;misunderstanding observed indicators in scales and evaluation index.Suggestions:Composite reliability is important for internal consistency evaluation;Reevaluating reliability is necessary when reliability is introduced;Content validity index(CVI)is appropriate when assessing content validity;The suitability of research context is considered when using foreign scales;The difference between reflective and informative indicators should be observed;CMV should be inspected and controlled;Scales are not recommended to use to conduct evaluation research.

关 键 词：体育管理 量表 信度 效度 共同方法变异 

分 类 号：G80-3[文化科学—运动人体科学]