Premium
Psychometric properties and factor structure of the adapted Self‐Regulation Questionnaire assessing autonomous and controlled motivation for healthful eating among youth with type 1 diabetes and their parents
Author(s) -
Quick V.,
Lipsky L. M.,
Nansel T. R.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
child: care, health and development
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.832
H-Index - 82
eISSN - 1365-2214
pISSN - 0305-1862
DOI - 10.1111/cch.12574
Subject(s) - varimax rotation , psychology , body mass index , clinical psychology , exploratory factor analysis , developmental psychology , medicine , psychometrics , cronbach's alpha
Background The purpose of this cross‐sectional study was to examine the psychometric properties of 2 adapted Self‐Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ) measures assessing youth with type 1 diabetes motivation internalization for healthful eating and their parents motivation internalization for providing healthy meals for the family. Methods External validity of the adapted SRQ was evaluated with respect to healthy eating attitudes (healthful eating self‐efficacy, barriers, and outcome expectations) assessed by questionnaire, diet quality (Healthy Eating Index‐2005 [HEI‐2005]; Nutrient‐Rich Foods Index 9.3 [NRF9.3]; Whole Plant Food Density [WPFD]) assessed by 3‐day food records, and body mass index assessed by measured height and weight in youth with type 1 diabetes ( N = 136; age 12.3 ± 2.5 years) and their parents. Results Exploratory factor analysis with varimax rotation yielded a 2‐factor structure with the expected autonomous and controlled motivation factors for both youth and parents. Internal consistencies of subscales were acceptable (α = .66–.84). Youth autonomous and controlled motivation were positively correlated overall ( r = 0.30, p < .001); however, in analyses stratified by age (<13 vs. ≥13 years), the correlation was not significant for youth ≥13 years. Autonomous motivation was significantly associated ( p < .001) with greater self‐efficacy (youth: r = 0.39, parent: r = 0.36), positive outcome expectations (youth: r = 0.30, parent: r = 0.35), and fewer barriers to healthful eating (youth: r = −0.36, parent: r = −0.32). Controlled motivation was positively correlated with negative outcome expectations for parents ( r = 0.29, p < .01) and both positive ( r = 0.28, p < .01) and negative ( r = 0.34, p < .001) outcome expectations for youth. Autonomous motivation was positively associated ( p < .05) with diet quality indicators for parents (NRF9.3 r = 0.22; WPFD r = 0.24; HEI‐2005 r = 0.22) and youth ≥13 years (NRF9.3 r = 0.26) but not youth < 13years. Among parents, but not youth, body mass index was associated negatively with autonomous motivation ( r = −.33, p < .001) and positively with controlled motivation ( r = .27, p < .01). Conclusions Findings provide initial support for the SRQ in this population and suggest potential developmental differences in the role of motivation on healthful eating among children, adolescents, and adults.