Decision-specific reinvestment scale: An exploration of its construct validity, and association with stress and coping appraisals
Section snippets
Study 1
In order to explore the construct validity of the DSRS, study 1 aimed to investigate the convergent and discriminant validity of the DSRS using the MSRS, the Preference for Intuition and Deliberation inventory (PID; Betsch, 2004) and the Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ; Mann, Burnett, Radford, & Ford, 1997). A secondary aim was to investigate whether sex differences should be expected regarding reinvestment.
The MSRS contains two factors: conscious motor processing, which reflects
Participants
A sample of 378 sport sciences students was involved in the study (286 men and 92 women; Mage = 19.06, age range = 18–24 years). They were participating in a range of 19 sports (i.e., 13 individual sports, 6 team sports), and were involved in sport practice for a mean of 8.30 years (SD = 4.29, range = 1–16 years).
Decision-Specific Reinvestment Scale (DSRS, Kinrade, Jackson, & Ashford, 2010; Kinrade, Jackson, Ashford, et al., 2010)
The 13 items of the DSRS (details concerning the French translation are available in the Procedure section) are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (“not characteristic”) to
CFA DSRS
The first test of the model yielded the following results: χ2 (64) = 241.6, SRMR = .072, RMSEA = .087, CFI = .89, and TLI = .86. The higher Modification Index (MI) suggested by AMOS is the adding of a covariance between the error variance of item 9 and item 10, MI = 70.146. This change results in the following model fit: χ2 (63) = 163, SRMR = .065, RMSEA = .07, CFI = .94, and TLI = .92. The next MI suggested is to move item 6 “J'ai parfois l'impression que je réfléchis trop à la manière dont je
Discussion
Following validation of the DSRS and the MSRS to the French language, the construct validity of the DSRS was examined using the MSRS and two external scales, the PID and the MDMQ. Sex differences regarding the DSRS and the MSRS were also investigated.
The CFAs results indicated that it was possible to confirm the original two-factor structure of the MSRS and DSRS according to Hu and Bentler's criteria (1999). Some modifications were taken into account in order to improve the model fit, such as
Study 2
It is acknowledged that decision reinvestment and performance breakdown under pressure are linked (Kinrade, Jackson, Ashford, et al., 2010). However, little is known about how individuals perceive this pressure or how they cope with it.
Stress is generally conceptualized as a unidimensional concept that represents the degree of external pressure and disturbed reaction associated with psychophysiological arousal (Lazarus, 2000). It is thought to be an underlying mechanism for many emotions, both
Participants
Two hundred forty-three handball regional players (138 men, 105 women) were initially screened to participate. In addition to the DSRS, several other questionnaires (e.g. personality, emotional intelligence, etc) were used to help blind participants regarding the basis of selection. A sample of 100 players (50 men, 50 women), were then categorized as low reinvesters (LR) and high reinvesters (HR), based on the norms established with the French validation realized with athletes in study 1 using
Relationship between stress and coping appraisals
Stressor intensity is significantly negatively related to stressor perceived controllability (r = −.24, p = .021) and to coping effectiveness (r = −.24, p = .023). Coping effectiveness is related positively to subjective performance (r = .37, p < .001) and stressor perceived controllability (r = .24, p = .019). Descriptive statistics and a full correlation matrix is presented in Table 2.
Decision reinvestment
The MANOVA indicated a main effect of decision reinvestment, F(8, 84) = 2.409, p = .022, Wilks's
Discussion
This study aimed to investigate how high and low reinvesters differ in terms of stress and coping appraisal, use of coping strategies, and perceived performance. Handball players were involved as participants and the study design took place during three regular season games.
Results showed that stressor intensity is negatively related to stressor perceived controllability (H1a) and coping effectiveness (H1b). This confirms findings by Nicholls et al. (2009), who consider stress as an
Conclusion
The aim of this research project was to explore the construct validity of the DSRS. Study 1, after an initial validation to the French language of the DSRS and the MSRS, explored the convergent and discriminant validity of DSRS together with the MSRS, the PID and the MDBQ. The potential for sex differences regarding reinvestment were also investigated. Study 2 subsequently explored the relationships between DSRS and stress and coping appraisals. Taken together, these findings provide insights
References (52)
- et al.
Development of a questionnaire for the assessment of coping strategies employed by athletes in competitive sport settings
Psychology of Sport and Exercise
(2002) Worry and rumination: differential associations with anxious and depressive symptoms and coping behavior
Behaviour Research and Therapy
(2007)- et al.
Dispositional reinvestment and skill failure in cognitive and motor tasks
Psychology of Sport and Exercise
(2010) - et al.
Trait emotional intelligence in sports: a protective role against stress through heart rate variability?
Personality and Individual Differences
(2011) - et al.
Trait emotional intelligence and preference for intuition and deliberation: respective influence on academic performance
Personality and Individual Differences
(2010) - et al.
Reinvestment: a dimension of personality implicated in skill breakdown under pressure
Personality and Individual Differences
(1993) - et al.
Personality, coping, and challenge and threat states in athletes
International Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology
(2012) AMOS 17.0 user's guide
(2008)- et al.
Adaptation et validation en langue française d'une échelle de prise de décision
Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science
(2011) - et al.
Translating questionnaires and other research instruments: Problems and solutions
(2000)
Why do athletes “choke” under pressure?
Präferenz für Intuition und Deliberation. Inventar zur Erfassung von affekt- und kognitionsbasiertem Entscheiden
Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie
Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming
Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance
Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal
Nonparametric statistics for non-statisticians: A step-by-step approach
Effects of stressor controllability on psychophysiological, cognitive and behavioural responses in patients with major depression and dysthymia
Psychological Medicine
Suppression of intrusive thoughts and working memory capacity in repressive coping
The American Journal of Psychology
Coping effectiveness: a path analysis of self-efficacy, control, coping, and performance in sport competitions
Journal of Applied Social Psychology
What else do you feel when you feel sad? Emotional overproduction, neuroticism and rumination
Emotion
Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives
Structural Equation Modeling
Attentional focus, dispositional reinvestment, and skilled motor performance under pressure
Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology
Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice and commitment
Adaptation to physically and emotionally demanding conditions: the role of deliberate practice
High Ability Studies
Testing structural equation models
Development and validation of the Decision-Specific Reinvestment Scale
Journal of Sports Sciences
Intuitive and deliberate judgments are based on common principles
Psychological Review
Cited by (20)
Performance and decision making of a complex skill under monitoring and outcome pressure conditions: Which of them can reinvestment predict?
2022, Psychology of Sport and ExerciseReinvestment: Examining convergent, discriminant, and criterion validity using psychometric and behavioral measures
2015, Personality and Individual DifferencesCitation Excerpt :To test the construct validity of the MSRS and DSRS we compared them to the PID (Betsch, 2004). The PID was used to investigate the construct validity of reinvestment when validating it to another language (Laborde et al., 2014). According to this conceptualization, individuals have two ways to make decisions, more intuitively or more deliberatively, which are not viewed as opposites ends of a continuum but as two independent constructs whose dominance is situation specific (Betsch, 2004).
The relationship between working memory, reinvestment, and heart rate variability
2015, Physiology and BehaviorIs the ability to keep your mind sharp under pressure reflected in your heart? Evidence for the neurophysiological bases of decision reinvestment
2014, Biological PsychologyCitation Excerpt :More specifically, they are both significantly correlated to decision time, generation time, and dynamic inconsistency; and show the same directions for number of generated options, first option quality and RMSSD (Table 5). So far, the effects of decision reinvestment are poorly understood at the cognitive and neurophysiological levels having only previously been studied using subjective reports (Kinrade et al., 2010; Laborde et al., 2014), global game results (Jackson et al., 2013), or with simple decisions in the laboratory (Poolton et al., 2011). The current study aimed to address this issue, using a controlled laboratory environment with direct performance measures and neurophysiological assessment, therefore allowing a more detailed examination of the relationship between decision reinvestment and decision-making performance under pressure.
A meta-analysis of the association between movement specific reinvestment and motor performance
2023, International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology