Development and validation of a self-efficacy instrument for university students in swimming lesson
Keywords:
Self-efficacy, swimming education, instrument development, factor analysis, content validity and reliabilityAbstract
Objective: This study aims to develop a self-efficacy measurement instrument for university students in swimming lessons based on Bandura's (1977) Self-Efficacy theory. The instrument was developed through 4 main dimensions, namely (1) D1 performance accomplishment, (2) D2 vicarious learning, (3) D3 verbal encouragement, and (4) D4 emotional states.
Methods: The development stages began with the preparation of instrument grids based on literature studies, content validity testing by experts, trial I with 203 students using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and trial II with 323 students using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Measurements were taken with Google Forms while students were attending swimming lessons.
Results: The results showed that trial I, data feasibility testing, gave Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) value of 0.946 and a significant Bartlett's Test (χ² = 5328; p < 0.001). This indicated that the data were suitable for factor analysis. EFA produced 4 main factors that explained 62% of the total variance, with factor loadings of 0.343 to 0.828. A total of 31 items had a uniqueness value below 0.5, while 1 item was >0.8, leading to its removal. After the removal, a final instrument consisting of 31 statement items spread across the 4 dimensions was obtained. Test II, which examined the feasibility of the first-order CFA model, demonstrated acceptable model fit. The results indicated χ² = 990, df = 430, p < .001, with a χ²/df ratio of 2.302. Additional fit indices further supported the model’s adequacy, namely Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.064 (90% CI: 0.058–0.069, p < .001), Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) = 0.045, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.997, and Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.997. All items in the 4 dimensions were declared valid, as evidenced by factor loading values of 0.688-0.966 and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) of 0.595-0.901. McDonald's omega ω₁-₃ values ranged from 0.882 to 0.939, and Cronbach's α ranged from 0.876 to 0.945. In the second order, the 4 dimensions were declared valid with loading factors of 0.93-0.97, AVE of 0.901, reliability ω₁-₃ of 0.926-0.935, and Cronbach's α of 0.945.
Conclusion: The developed self-efficacy instrument for swimming students proved to be psychometrically valid and reliable, making it suitable for use in identifying students' psychological readiness in swimming lessons
Downloads
References
1. Willcox-Pidgeon S, Leggat PA, Devine S, Franklin RC. Measuring the Swimming Skills of Adults Attending Swimming Lessons in Australia as a Drowning Prevention Measure. Heal Promot J Aust [Internet]. 2025 Apr 1 [cited 2025 Oct 8];36(2):e70010. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11800059/
2. Sinclair L, Roscoe CMP. The Impact of Swimming on Fundamental Movement Skill Development in Children (3–11 Years): A Systematic Literature Review. Children [Internet]. 2023 Aug 1 [cited 2025 Oct 8];10(8):1411. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10453388/
3. Dybińska E, Kaca M. Self-assessment of swimming techniques in terms of noticeable kinesthetic impressions and self-observation. J Kinesiol Exerc Sci [Internet]. 2007 [cited 2025 Nov 24];17(40). Available from: https://jkes.eu/article/22193/en
4. Petrass LA, Blitvich JD, Mcelroy GK, Harvey J, Moran K, Petrass LA;, et al. Can You Swim? Self-Report and Actual Swimming Competence Among Young Adults in Ballarat, Australia. Int J Aquat Res Educ [Internet]. 2012 May 1 [cited 2025 Nov 24];6(2):5. Available from: https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/ijare/vol6/iss2/5
5. Dimitrić G, Jakšić M, Sadri F, Šajber D, Kaurin T, Zenić N, et al. How University Students Assess Their Water Skills. Front Sport Act Living. 2022;4(May):1–9.
6. Rejman M, Kwaśna A, Chrobot M, Kjendlie PL, Stalmann RK. Perceived Versus Real Swimming Skills of Adolescents under Standard and Challenging Conditions: Exploring Water Competencies as an Approach to Drowning Prevention. Int J Environ Res Public Health [Internet]. 2020 Jun 1 [cited 2025 Nov 24];17(11):3826. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7312204/
7. Luo S, Luo S, Ren Z, Zhang H, Li X, Liu L. The influence of water safety knowledge on adolescents’ drowning risk behaviors: a framework of risk-protect integrated and KAP theory. Front Public Heal [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2025 Nov 29];12:1354231. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11127589/
8. Ensrud-Skraastad OK, Haga M. Associations between Motor Competence, Physical Self-Perception and Autonomous Motivation for Physical Activity in Children. Sports [Internet]. 2020 Sep 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];8(9):120. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7552734/
9. Lawson C, Eyre ELJ, Tallis J, Watts M, Duncan MJ. Identifying actual and perceived motor competence based profiles among children. J Sports Sci [Internet]. 2022 Mar 19 [cited 2025 Nov 29];40(6):621–9. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02640414.2021.2009169
10. De Meester A, Maes J, Stodden D, Cardon G, Goodway J, Lenoir M, et al. Identifying profiles of actual and perceived motor competence among adolescents: associations with motivation, physical activity, and sports participation. 2016 [cited 2025 Nov 29]; Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rjsp20
11. Monteiro GN, Araújo ND, Mazzardo T, Francisco PS, Ribas S, Aburachid LMC. Practice schedule analysis and pedagogical feedback in swimming classes. J Phys Educ Sport. 2021;21(3):1950–7.
12. Zatoń K, Szczepan S. The Impact of Immediate Verbal Feedback on the Improvement of Swimming Technique. J Hum Kinet [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2025 Oct 8];41(1):143. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4120447/
13. Guo Q, Wang X, Gao Z, Gao J, Lin X, Samsudin S. The influence of teacher support on student engagement in physical education among college students: The mediating effects of autonomous motivation and self-efficacy. PLoS One [Internet]. 2025 Sep 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];20(9):e0331876. Available from: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0331876
14. Minkels C, van der Kamp J, de Vries R, Beek PJ. Learning how to swim in 5- to 12-year-old children: a scoping review of evidence-based motor learning methods. Front Sport Act Living. 2025 Feb 12;7:1505301.
15. Su W, Liu Q. The impact of physical education teacher support on sport participation among college students: the chain mediating effects of physical education learning motivation and self-efficacy. Front Psychol. 2025 Jun 2;16:1592753.
16. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychol Rev [Internet]. 1977 [cited 2025 Oct 14];84(2). Available from: https://educational-innovation.sydney.edu.au/news/pdfs/Bandura 1977.pdf
17. Huang W, Wei R, Cheng B. The impact of exercising self-efficacy on physical education learning engagement: the mediating role of flow experience. Front Psychol. 2025 Jun 4;16:1588643.
18. Syahrastani S. The Effect of Direct Learning Model with Routine Practice on Self-Efficacy and Student Learning Outcomes. J Konseling dan Pendidik. 2022;10(1):47.
19. Berukoff KD, Hill GM. A Study of Factors That Influence the Swimming Performance of Hispanic High School Students. Int J Aquat Res Educ [Internet]. 2010 Nov 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];4(4):7. Available from: https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/ijare/vol4/iss4/7
20. Mousa Ay K, Halaweh R, Al-Taieb MA. Positive self-talk and its effect on learning the grab start skill in swimming and self-efficacy improvement. J Phys Educ Sport. 2013;13(4):578–82.
21. Baybay LA, Celedio C, Galido MH, Ganzon A, Cadigal B. Preparation and Self-Assessment of the Basic Swimming Skills: Student’s Experiences. Psychol Educ A Multidiscip J [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2025 Nov 24];15(2):1–1. Available from: https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=22607
22. Boateng GO, Neilands TB, Frongillo EA, Melgar-Quiñonez HR, Young SL. Best Practices for Developing and Validating Scales for Health, Social, and Behavioral Research: A Primer. Front Public Heal [Internet]. 2018 Jun 11 [cited 2025 Nov 29];6:366616. Available from: www.frontiersin.org
23. Tavakol M, Wetzel A. Factor Analysis: a means for theory and instrument development in support of construct validity. Int J Med Educ [Internet]. 2020 Nov 6 [cited 2025 Nov 29];11:245–7. Available from: https://www.ijme.net/archive/11/factor-analysis/
24. Alizadeh M, Shahsavari H, Matourypour P. Key points in writing instrument development and psychometric evaluation reports. Rev Bras Enferm [Internet]. 2025 [cited 2025 Nov 29];78(4):e20250006. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12494348/
25. Kundu A. Toward a framework for strengthening participants’ self-efficacy in online education. Asian Assoc Open Univ J [Internet]. 2020 Dec 1 [cited 2025 Oct 14];15(3):351–70. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/AAOUJ-06-2020-0039
26. Sheu H Bin, Lent RW, Miller MJ, Penn LT, Cusick ME, Truong NN. Sources of self-efficacy and outcome expectations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics domains: A meta-analysis. J Vocat Behav [Internet]. 2018 Dec 1 [cited 2025 Oct 14];109:118–36. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001879118301131
27. Anderson SL, Betz NE. Sources of Social Self-Efficacy Expectations: Their Measurement and Relation to Career Development. J Vocat Behav [Internet]. 2001 Feb 1 [cited 2025 Oct 14];58(1):98–117. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001879100917536
28. Egele VS, Klopp E, Stark R. An empirical ranking of the importance of the sources of self-efficacy for physical activity. Heal Psychol Behav Med [Internet]. 2025 Dec 31 [cited 2025 Oct 14];13(1):2567322. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12502103/
29. Romero Jeldres M, Díaz Costa E, Faouzi Nadim T. A review of Lawshe’s method for calculating content validity in the social sciences. Front Educ. 2023 Nov 20;8:1271335.
30. Sigudla J, Maritz JE. Exploratory factor analysis of constructs used for investigating research uptake for public healthcare practice and policy in a resource-limited setting, South Africa. BMC Health Serv Res [Internet]. 2023 Dec 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];23(1):1423. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10724913/
31. Kaiser HF. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika [Internet]. 1974 [cited 2025 Nov 29];39:31–6. Available from: http://cda.psych.uiuc.edu/psychometrika_citation_classic_summaries/kaiser_citation_classic_factor_simplicity.pdf
32. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed. Pearson Education Limited; 2014.
33. Goyal H, Aleem S. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Psychometric Validation of Healthy Lifestyle and Personal Control Questionnaire (HLPCQ) in India. Indian J Community Med Off Publ Indian Assoc Prev Soc Med [Internet]. 2023 Jul 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];48(3):430. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10353679/
34. Phanniphong K, Na-Nan K. Development and validation of a factor analysis-validated comprehensive scale for measuring innovative work behavior. Sustain Futur [Internet]. 2025 Jun 1 [cited 2025 Oct 14];9:100704. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666188825002710
35. Worthington RL, Whittaker TA. Scale Development Research: A Content Analysis and Recommendations for Best Practices. Couns Psychol [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2025 Nov 28];34(6):806–38. Available from: /doi/pdf/10.1177/0011000006288127?download=true
36. Ziegler M, Hagemann D. Testing the Unidimensionality of Items. https://doi.org/101027/1015-5759/a000309 [Internet]. 2015 Dec 14 [cited 2025 Nov 28];31(4):231–7. Available from: /doi/pdf/10.1027/1015-5759/a000309
37. Howard MC. A Review of Exploratory Factor Analysis Decisions and Overview of Current Practices: What We Are Doing and How Can We Improve? Int J Hum Comput Interact [Internet]. 2016 Jan 2 [cited 2025 Nov 28];32(1):51–62. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10447318.2015.1087664
38. Brown C, Hegarty K. Development and validation of the TAR Scale: A measure of technology-facilitated abuse in relationships. Comput Hum Behav Reports [Internet]. 2021 Jan 1 [cited 2025 Oct 14];3:100059. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451958821000075
39. Al-Khadher MA, Alghamdi AA, Saraa N, Albursan IS, Bakhiet SF, AL-Qadri AH. The dimensional validity and reliability of the Italian smartphone addiction inventory of Yemeni university students. Acta Psychol (Amst) [Internet]. 2024 Oct 1 [cited 2025 Nov 28];250:104493. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691824003718
40. Fu Y, Wen Z, Wang Y. A Comparison of Reliability Estimation Based on Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Exploratory Structural Equation Models. Educ Psychol Meas [Internet]. 2021 Apr 1 [cited 2025 Nov 28];82(2):205. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8850766/
41. Fraenkel JR, Wallen NE, Hyun HH. How to Design and Evaluate Research In Education (6th ed.). New York: Mc Graw HIll; 2012.
42. Jiang G, Tan X, Wang H, Xu M, Wu X. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses identify three structural dimensions for measuring physical function in community-dwelling older adults. PeerJ [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2025 Nov 29];11:e15182. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10355189/
43. Hair JF, Howard MC, Nitzl C. Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. J Bus Res [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2025 Nov 29];109:101–10. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.069
44. Costello AB, Osborne JW. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pract Assessment, Res Eval [Internet]. 2005 Jan 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];10(1). Available from: https://openpublishing.library.umass.edu/pare/article/id/1650/
45. Jaff MM, Kadar Hamsa AA. Exploratory factor analysis on advantages and disadvantages of potential female telecommuters in Kuala Lumpur. Asian Transp Stud [Internet]. 2021 Jan 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];7:100034. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S218555602100002X
46. Maskey R, Fei J, Nguyen HO. Use of exploratory factor analysis in maritime research. Asian J Shipp Logist [Internet]. 2018 Jun 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];34(2):91–111. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2092521218300245
47. Dalawi I, Isa MR, Aimran N. Exploratory factor analysis on the development and validation of the understanding, attitude, practice and health literacy questionnaire on COVID-19 in Malay language. Sci Rep [Internet]. 2025 Dec 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];15(1):19654. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12137934/
48. Schmitt TA. Current methodological considerations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. J Psychoeduc Assess [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2025 Nov 29];29(4):304–21. Available from: /doi/pdf/10.1177/0734282911406653?download=true
49. Gutiérrez-Aguilar O, Turpo-Gebera O, Chicaña-Huanca S, Laura-de-la-Cruz KM, Pérez-Postigo G, Diaz-Zavala R, et al. Digital skills and digital citizenship education: an analysis based on structural equation modeling. J Technol Sci Educ. 2024;14(3):738–55.
50. Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int J Med Educ [Internet]. 2011 Jun 27 [cited 2025 Nov 29];2:53. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4205511/
51. Montoya AK, Edwards MC. The Poor Fit of Model Fit for Selecting Number of Factors in Exploratory Factor Analysis for Scale Evaluation. Educ Psychol Meas [Internet]. 2020 Jun 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];81(3):413. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8072951/
52. Basirimoghadam M, Rafii F, Ebadi A. Development and psychometric evaluation of nurses’ health-related procrastination scale. Heliyon [Internet]. 2023 Jul 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];9(7):e18145. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844023053537
53. Sönmez ÖF, Başer A, Sofuoğlu Z. Climate Change Perceptions Scale for Health and Related Professionals and Students (CCPS-HARPS) – development, reliability and validity. J Clim Chang Heal [Internet]. 2025 Nov 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];26:100589. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667278225000926
54. Fonseca-Pinto R, Moreno-Murcia JA. Teaching Self-efficacy and Teaching Methods in the Aquatic Environment. F1000Research [Internet]. 2025 [cited 2025 Nov 29];13:1363. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11904400/
55. Chan DKC, Lee ASY, Macfarlane DJ, Hagger MS, Hamilton K. Validation of the swimming competence questionnaire for children. J Sports Sci [Internet]. 2020 Jul 17 [cited 2025 Nov 29];38(14):1666–73. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02640414.2020.1754724
56. Mansolf M, Reise SP. When and why the second-order and bifactor models are distinguishable. Intelligence [Internet]. 2017 Mar 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];61:120–9. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289616301878
57. Jalali A, Sharifi A, Vaisi Raygani AA, Ghesmati F, Naghibzadeh A, Taghvostani NM, et al. Psychometric Evaluation of the Persian Version of the Professional Socialization Scale for Hospital Nurses: A Methodological Study. SAGE Open Nurs [Internet]. 2025 Jan 1 [cited 2025 Nov 29];11. Available from: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/23779608251345276&hl=id&sa=T&oi=ucasa&ct=ufr&ei=pn8qaeTYNoqi6rQPkt_b8QU&scisig=ABGrvjLPv8mSQnXHlE6-Cbk8oamv
