Development, content validity and test-retest reliability of the Lifelong Physical Activity Skills Battery in adolescents

ABSTRACT

Numerous skill batteries assess fundamental motor skill (e.g., kick, hop) competence. Few skill batteries examine lifelong physical activity skill competence (e.g., resistance training). This study aimed to develop and assess the content validity, test-retest and inter-rater reliability of the “Lifelong Physical Activity Skills Battery”. Development of the skill battery occurred in three stages: i) systematic reviews of lifelong physical activity participation rates and existing motor skill assessment tools, ii) practitioner consultation and iii) research expert consultation. The final battery included eight skills: grapevine, golf swing, jog, push-up, squat, tennis forehand, upward dog and warrior I. Adolescents (28 boys, 29 girls; M = 15.8 years, SD = 0.4 years) completed the Lifelong Physical Activity Skills Battery on two occasions two weeks apart. The skill battery was highly reliable (ICC = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.72–0.90) with individual skill reliability scores ranging from moderate (warrior I; ICC = 0.56) to high (tennis forehand; ICC = 0.82). Typical error (4.0; 95% CI 3.4–5.0) and proportional bias (r = −0.21, p = .323) were low. This study has provided preliminary evidence for the content validity and reliability of the Lifelong Physical Activity Skills Battery in an adolescent population.

KEYWORDS:

• Movement
• motor competence
• motor skills
• measurement

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank all individuals who provided feedback related to the development of the Lifelong Physical Activity Skill Battery. In particular, we would like to thank the following experts for their time and effort that made this project possible: Dr Ali Brian, Dr Kristen Cohen, Dr Stuart Fairclough, Dr Lawrence Foweather, Dr Zan Gao, Dr Nancy Getchell, Dr Natalie Lander, Dr Meghann Lloyd, Dr Vitor Lopes, Dr Wesley O’Brien, Ms Kara Palmer, Dr Karin Pfeiffer, Dr Nicky Ridgers, Dr Luís Rodrigues, Dr James Rudd, Dr Jordan Smith, Dr David Stodden, Dr Larissa True, Dr Elizabeth Webster

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

Author 1 is supported through an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship. Author 2 is supported by an Alfred Deakin Postdoctoral Fellowship. Author 7 is supported by an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship [G1301163].