![Sample our Behavioral Sciences journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110801/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Behavioral-Sciences.jpg"})
Abstract
Touted as a multidimensional measure of mental toughness in sport, this study explored the psychometric properties of the Psychological Performance Inventory (PPI; Loehr, Citation1986) and its successor the Psychological Performance Inventory–A (PPI–A; Golby, Sheard, & Van Wersch, Citation2007). Confirmatory factor analysis was employed to examine the extent to which data collected with 333 Australian footballers aged between 15 and 18 years (M = 16.88, SD = .71) fitted the a priori measurement models of both inventories. The results did not support the psychometric properties of the PPI both in terms of model fit and internal consistency. Although model fit data for the PPI–A were encouraging, inadequate levels of internal consistency were evidenced. Convergent validity analyses involving measures of achievement goals and global mental toughness generally supported the validity of the PPI and PPI–A subscales. Taken together with previous research (e.g., Middleton et al., Citation2004), caution is urged when considering the use of the PPI as a measure of mental toughness in sport. Although the empirical data were generally supportive of the psychometric properties of the PPI–A, conceptual (e.g., lack of conceptual underpinnings) and methodological (i.e., revalidated a flawed inventory) concerns become important factors when considering the PPI–A as a measure of mental toughness.
Acknowledgments
Daniel F. Gucciardi is supported by a University of Queensland Postdoctoral Research Fellowship. Appreciation is extended to those individuals who assisted with participant recruitment, and to the anonymous reviewers and the Associate Editor for their constructive feedback on an earlier version of this article.