Raedeke和Smith運動員倦怠問卷（ABQ）之信效度研究

Revision of Raedeke and Smith's Athlete Burnout Questionnaire (ABQ): Analyses of validity and reliability of Chinese version

目的：本研究的目的在修訂Raedeke and Smith（2001）運動員倦怠問卷 （Athlete Burnout Questionnaire,ABQ）成為中文問卷以供學術研究之用。方法：本研究以三階段，共442位大專甲組運動員為研究對象，利用RaedekeandSmith（2001）所編製之三向度15題版本之ABQ施測於上述對象。本研究利用項目分析、探索性因素分析、驗証性因素分析、內部一致性檢定、效標關聯效度、和再測信度分析進行中文版運動員倦怠問卷之信、效度檢驗。結果：本研究發現修訂過後之中文版之運動員倦怠問卷（ABQ）同於RaedekeandSmith（2001）（ABQ）之三向度構念，但刪除4題，共11題，且具有可接受之信度和效度。結論：本研究結論指出文化和方法學上的限制為可能導致中文版運動員問卷因素構面同於英文原版，但題數卻不同於英文原版的原因，本研究建議若干方向提供未來研究者再度修訂時之用，或者利用本研究之中文版ABQ檢驗相關理論。

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to revise Raedeke and Smith's (2001) Athlete Burnout Questionnaire (ABQ) into Chinese and to examine its' validity and reliability, and to provide a valid and reliable measure for future study in Chinese settings. Method: This study sampled 442 intercollegiate athletes and administered with revised Chinese version of ABQ in three respective studies. Statistical analyses included item analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Chronbach alpha coefficients, criterion correlation validity, and re-test reliability. Results: All statistical indexes, coefficients, and values indicated that an 11-items with 3-factor Chinese version of ABQ was a reliable and valid measure for burnout study in Chinese settings. Conclusion: This study concluded that cultural and methodological limitation might explain why Chinese version of ABQ deleted 4 original items and suggested that future study might re-examine the semantic contents of 4 deleted items and revise it again with appropriate approaches, and also suggested future study might adopt Chinese version of ABQ to examine related theories.