Invariance testing and factor analysis of the Group Conflict Questionnaire

Kyle F. Paradis, Luc J. Martin, Sebastian Harenberg

Research output: Contribution to journalMeeting Abstract

Abstract

Intragroup conflict can be defined as 'a dynamic process that occurs between interdependent parties as they experience negative emotional reactions to perceived disagreements and interference with attainment of their goals' (Barki & Hartwick, 2004, p. 234). Building on this constitutive definition, the development of the Group Conflict Questionnaire (GCQ; Paradis, Carron, & Martin, 2014) has enabled researchers to operationally define intragroup conflict, which is an important construct to understand as it is prevalent in sport settings (e.g., Holt et al., 2012; Mellalieu et al., 2013). Considering the recent development of the measure, and that establishing validity is an ongoing process (Carron et al., 1985), further utilization and validation of the inventory is warranted. Thus, the purpose of the present investigation was to further validate the GCQ through factor analysis and invariance testing. A total of 742 (female n = 413, male n = 329, Mage = 19.51, SD = 1.87) competitive (n = 528) and recreational (n = 214) athletes (starters n = 622, non-starters n = 120) completed the questionnaire. Results of the confirmatory factor analysis indicated an acceptable factor structure with good model fit (χ2/df = 6.50, CFI = .94, TLI = .93, NNFI = .93, RMSEA = .086, 90%CI .079- .093), and excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = .92) for the subscales of task and social conflict. The invariance testing also revealed evidence of model invariance across gender, competition level, and starting status (ΔCFI <.01) for measurement weights and intercepts as well as structural covariances. The results from the current investigation indicate that researchers can continue to utilize this measure of intragroup conflict with confidence in their research. Future directions are discussed such as the assessment and appropriateness of the measure in other populations (e.g., youth sport athletes) and translation to other languages (e.g., Kashani, 2016).
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)S299-S299
JournalJOURNAL OF SPORT & EXERCISE PSYCHOLOGY
Volume39
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2017

Cite this