The Factor Structure and Reliability of the Student

Athletes' Motivation toward Sports and Academics

Questionnaire (SAMSAQ)

Joy L. Gaston-Gayles

Journal of College Student Development, Volume 46, Number 3,

May/June 2005, pp. 317-327 (Article)

Published by Johns Hopkins University Press

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2005.0025

For additional information about this article

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/182833

[200.17.203.183] Project MUSE (2025-05-20 12:05 GMT) UFPR-Universidade Federal do Parana

Research in Brief John H. Schuh, ASSOCIATE EDITOR

The Factor Structure and Reliability of the Student

Athletes’ Motivation toward Sports and Academics
Questionnaire (SAMSAQ)
Joy L. Gaston-Gayles

Predicting the academic performance of future academic performance. The weight of

college athletes has been a topic of interest in the evidence suggests that African American
the literature over the past few decades. Of male athletes who participate in revenue
particular importance to college admini- producing sports enter college underprepared
strators, the media, and the National Col- (Purdy, Eitzen, & Hufnagel, 1985; Sellers,
legiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is the rate 1992) and are less likely to achieve academic
at which college athletes graduate and make success compared to their athlete and non-
progress toward degree completion, as well as athlete peers (Ervin, Saunders, Gillis, &
identifying what factors are related to and Hogrebe, 1985; Purdy et al.). Other studies
predict academic performance. Standardized have focused on the predictability of non-
test scores and high school grades are the most traditional measures of academic success,
commonly used variables to predict academic particularly with regard to nontraditional
[200.17.203.183] Project MUSE (2025-05-20 12:05 GMT) UFPR-Universidade Federal do Parana

performance in college and are used by the populations (Tracey & Sedlacek, 1984, 1985).
NCAA to determine initial eligibility to These studies focused on what factors, besides
compete in college sports; however, these standardized test score, high school grades, and
variables do not accurately predict academic high school rank are related to academic
performance for all groups of students (Tracey performance. Tracey and Sedlacek (1984)
& Sedlacek, 1985). Bowen and Levin (2003) introduced the Noncognitive Questionnaire
suggested that academic performance “depends (NCQ) to measure seven noncognitive vari-
on interests, motivation, time management ables and their influence on academic per-
skills, creativity, and other late-developing formance. In a follow-up study using the
qualities that no battery of tests captures well” NCQ the authors found that noncognitive
(p. 117). For the purpose of this study, I variables, in addition to SAT score, accounted
sought to examine motivation as a nontradi- for a greater portion of the explained variance
tional measure through the development of a in academic performance than just SAT score
scale to assess academic and athletic moti- alone. They also found that predictors of
vation. academic performance vary in kind and over
A number of early studies examined the time for African American and White college
usefulness of traditional variables (e.g., students (Tracey & Sedlacek, 1985).
standardized test scores, high school grades, Student athletes are considered a non-
high school class rank, etc.) in predicting traditional population of college students and

Joy L. Gaston-Gayles is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Educational Leadership & Policy Studies at
Florida State University.

MAY /JUNE 2005 ◆ VOL 46 NO 3 317

Research in Brief

several studies have examined the predictability Sellers (1992) included two motivation items
of noncognitive variables for this population in the analysis: (a) number of hours spent
(Petrie & Stoever, 1997; Sedlacek & Adams- studying, and (b) desire to earn a college
Gaston, 1992; Young & Sowa, 1992). Sed- degree. The results of the study indicated no
lacek and Adams-Gaston found that SAT score difference between African American and
did not predict first semester grades for White athletes on either of the motivation
freshmen athletes at a Division I school. factors. Moreover, Sellers concluded that
Rather, noncognitive variables, particularly although African American athletes entered
having individual and community support, college less prepared, they were not auto-
and a positive self-concept, were most mean- matically less motivated as a result. Snyder
ingful in predicting academic performance. (1996) studied the academic and athletic
Moreover, the authors suggested that SAT motivation of male athletes at Division I and
score should not be used solely to predict Division III institutions by having participants
future academic performance. respond to “situations in which they had more
Studies examining the predictability of or less academically versus athletically inclined
noncognitive variables for student athletes alternatives available” (p. 658). The findings
have also been done by race and gender. Young indicated that at Division I institutions,
and Sowa (1992) found that traditional African American athletes responded more
variables alone did not predict academic favorably toward the desire to play at the
performance for African American athletes. In professional level than White athletes; how-
fact, only high school grades were related to ever, at Division III institutions where there
academic performance for African American is little influence of professionalism associated
athletes. Moreover, the authors found goal with athletics, there was not a significant
setting, understanding racism, and community difference in motivation between African
service to be significant predictors of academic American and White athletes. These results
performance for this population. Concerning suggest that the professionalism associated
female athletes, Petrie and Stoever (1997) with the institution may have an impact on
found that the amount of variance in grades motivation.
explained by SAT score decreased as the Only one study to date has studied
women matriculated through college, and that motivation from a theoretical perspective.
other factors came into play the longer women According to Simons, Van Rheenen, and
remained in school. The authors suggested Covington (1999), student athletes experience
examining other noncognitive variables that uneven levels of academic and athletic
have the potential to predict academic motivation. “Most [athletes] are highly
performance. motivated to succeed in the athletic domain
Only a few studies have examined moti- . . . However, many of the most visible student
vation in relation to academic performance. athletes seem to lack motivation in the
In 1988, the Center for the Study of Athletics classroom” (p. 151). Using self-worth theory
found that athletes who aspired to play at the as a conceptual framework, the authors studied
professional level also had a high desire to earn academic motivation of student athletes using
a college degree. In a study that examined a combination of several scales. The findings
predictors of academic performance for from this study indicated that failure-avoiders
African American and White student athletes, (those motivated to avoid failure but

318 Journal of College Student Development

Research in Brief

unmotivated to strive for success) and failure- can be determined by an individual’s choice
acceptors (those unmotivated to avoid failure of, persistence on, and amount of effort
and strive for success) were more committed applied to a task (Weiner, 1984). Related to
to the athletic role than success-oriented this definition, individuals who are highly
athletes (those motivated to strive for success) motivated to approach success tend to apply
and overstrivers (those motivated to strive for a great deal of effort and time toward success-
success and avoid failure). The authors also ful completion of a chosen task.
found that athletic commitment was nega- Expectancy-value theory is a function of
tively related to college grades. Additionally, two major components: (a) the probability
males had a larger percentage of failure- that an individual will successfully complete
avoiders than females, revenue athletes had a a task, and (b) the value associated with
larger percentage of both failure-avoiders and successful completion of the task (Spence &
failure-acceptors and fewer success oriented Helmreich, 1983). Moreover, Eccles (1983)
athletes than nonathletes, and African Ameri- postulates that expectancy, or the probability
cans had a larger percentage of failure-avoiders of success, is influenced by individuals’ self-
and fewer success-oriented athletes than non- concept about their ability to successfully
African American athletes. complete a task and the level of difficulty
associated with completing the task. The value
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK attached to a task is a function of the extent
to which the task fulfills a need, aids in current
To expand on the use of motivation theories goal attainment, and is important in fulfilling
in measuring academic and athletic moti- a future goal. For the purpose of this study,
[200.17.203.183] Project MUSE (2025-05-20 12:05 GMT) UFPR-Universidade Federal do Parana

vation, this study used an expectancy-value expectancy-value was also informed by two
framework to inform the development of the additional personal belief theories, self-efficacy
Student Athletes’ Motivation toward Sports (Bandura, 1986) and attribution (Weiner,
and Academics Questionnaire (SAMSAQ). 1984). Each theory is briefly explained below
Motivation has been defined as the intensity in relation to its application in measuring
and direction of behavior (Silva & Weinberg, academic and athletic motivation.
1984). Intensity refers to how much effort an The basic assumption underlying self-
individual applies to a given task, whereas efficacy theory is that individuals make
direction indicates the choice to complete or judgments about their ability to successfully
not to complete a given task. Hence, moti- complete a task (Bandura, 1977). Based on
vation signifies an individual’s choice of and this information, individuals tend to avoid
effort applied toward a task. Student athletes tasks that they believe they cannot complete
choose both to participate in their sport and successfully, but become engaged in tasks they
attend college. However, the amount of effort believe they can complete successfully. To that
or intensity they apply to academic and end, student athletes who believe that they can
athletic tasks may vary. excel in their sport are willing to approach the
Achievement motivation theories, parti- task, or put forth effort to succeed; however,
cularly the expectancy-value model, were used student athletes who may have trouble in math
to construct the items on the SAMSAQ. A are not likely to approach but avoid math
basic assumption of achievement motivation related assignments.
theory is that motivation toward a given task The basic assumption of attribution theory

MAY /JUNE 2005 ◆ VOL 46 NO 3 319

Research in Brief

(Weiner, 1984) is that individuals search for as across NCAA Division I institutions
causal explanations for behavioral outcomes (NCAA, 2003). The sample represents a six
to use as a basis for deciding whether to to nine percent difference in the representation
approach success or avoid failure on future of males and females across NCAA Division
tasks. Graham (1991) suggested that indi- I institutions and team rosters, respectively.
viduals especially seek explanations for About 39% of the participants received a
negative or unexpected outcomes. The most full athletic scholarship, 31% received a partial
common causal attributes in the achievement athletic scholarship, and about 29% received
domain are ability, effort, task difficulty, luck, no athletic scholarship. Participants ranged
and help from others. Moreover, these causal across years of eligibility remaining. Nine
attributes elicit emotional responses that percent reported four years remaining, 32%
influence future behavior. reported three years remaining, 25% reported
The purpose of this study was to develop two years remaining, 18% reported one year
an instrument to measure student athletes’ remaining, and 16% reported zero years
motivation toward sports and academics using remaining.
an expectancy-value framework. Two major
Instrumentation
research objectives guided this study: to
determine the (a) factor structure and (b) The SAMSAQ was created to measure aca-
reliability of the Student Athletes’ Motivation demic and athletic motivation of college
toward Sports and Academics Questionnaire. athletes (Gaston, 2002). The items were
constructed from the basic principles and
METHOD assumptions of expectancy-value, self-efficacy,
and attribution theories. The initial scale
Participants
consisted of 30 items that examined the extent
The sample for this study included 236 to which athletes were motivated toward
student athletes who participated in eight academic and athletic related tasks (see full
varsity sports at a Division I university in the scale in the appendix). The scale consisted of
Midwest. The eight sports in this study 15 items intended to measure academic
included football, men’s and women’s basket- motivation and 15 items intended to measure
ball, men’s volleyball, men’s and women’s athletic motivation. Participants were asked to
lacrosse, women’s field hockey, and softball. indicate their level of agreement with each
The racial composition of the sample was 70% statement measured on a six-point Likert-type
White and 30% non-White. The sample scale, ranging from very strongly agree (6) to
represented about 10% fewer White student very strongly disagree (1). Demographic
athletes and about 10% more non-White information was also collected as a part of the
student athletes than indicated on the athletic SAMSAQ. The demographic questions as-
team rosters at the institution. A large sessed type of sport, gender, scholarship status,
percentage of ethnic minorities were present parent(s) level of education, age, and race/
in this sample due to the high numbers of ethnicity. The demographic questions were
ethnic minorities who participate in football included at the end of the scale.
and men’s basketball, which account for 44%
of the sample. Participants were 33% female Procedure
and 67% male, which is slightly more males The SAMSAQ was administered to student
and fewer females than the team roster, as well athletes during separate academic team

320 Journal of College Student Development

Research in Brief

meetings for each of the eight sports. Before for the two-factor model was .094. This value
administering the survey, permission was was just shy of being unacceptable (i.e., a value
obtained from the athletic director, director e” 1) (Browne & Cudeck, 1992). The RMSEA
of academic support services, as well as the 90% confidence interval for the two-factor
human subjects committee at the university. model was (.088, .100), indicating that the
Participation was solicited from the entire factor structure would range from mediocre
squad list for each team on a voluntary basis. to poor over repeated samples.
The total number of student athletes who Item-to-total correlations and Cronbach’s
completed the survey was 236, a response rate alpha coefficients were examined to assess the
of 76%. internal consistency of the two subscales of the
hypothesized model. Although the two-factor
RESULTS model was not the model of choice, these
measures gave an indication of which items
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and reli- were problematic in the model. Three items
ability estimates were conducted to confirm were eliminated due to low item-to-total
the underlying structure and internal consis- correlations, low reliability, and low factor
tency of the items on the scale. Comprehensive loadings. The three-factor model consisted of
Exploratory Factor Analysis (CEFA) (Browne, 27 items instead of 30 items. Two items loaded
Cudeck, Tateneni, & Mels, 1999) was used high on two of the three factors, but the
to conduct the analysis. This statistical relationship was positive on one factor and
program is unique because it produces a negative on the other. These items were used
measure of model fit, as well as confidence in computing composite scores for both
[200.17.203.183] Project MUSE (2025-05-20 12:05 GMT) UFPR-Universidade Federal do Parana

intervals for model fit, standard errors for factors; however the scale was reversed for the
rotated factor loadings, and factor correlations. factor on which the item had a negative factor
loading so that higher numerical values
Factor Extraction indicated higher motivation scores.
In developing the SAMSAQ it was hypoth- The rotated three-factor solution after the
esized that the scale would yield two factors, three items were eliminated yielded an
an academic motivation factor and an athletic acceptable fit of the model to the data. The
motivation factor. To test this hypothesis, two, RMSEA value was .069 and the 90% confi-
three, and four factor solutions were examined. dence interval was (.061, .077), which was
Several criteria were used in determining the much more acceptable than the two-factor
best fit of the model to the data: the eigenvalue model (See Table 1). Moreover, the items that
rule, the scree test, RMSEA values, and loaded on each factor had characteristics that
interpretability according to the characteristics were interpretable. Thus, the three-factor
of the items loading on each factor. In general, solution was the model of choice for this study.
there were a total of six eigenvalues greater than
one; however, three eigenvalues accounted for Factor Interpretation
the largest amount of variance. The scree test The items loading on each factor shared
supported a three-factor model, although in common characteristics that aided in naming
examining the scree plot it was clear that there the factors appropriately. The first factor was
were two large factors that accounted for most named student athletic motivation (SAM) and
of the explained variance. The RMSEA value consisted of eight items. This subscale

MAY /JUNE 2005 ◆ VOL 46 NO 3 321

Research in Brief

TABLE 1. indicated the extent to which the participants

Factor Loadings for Exploratory Factor were motivated to pursue their sport. The
Analysis and Reliability Estimates items reflected the type of motivation one
would expect student athletes to have given
Factor the fact that they chose to compete at the
collegiate level. The second factor was named
SAM CAM AM Alpha
career athletic motivation (CAM) and con-
Item 2 .67 .08 .07 sisted of five items. This subscale was distinctly
Item 12 .75 -.01 .16 different from the SAM subscale in that the
Item 13 .59 .16 .01 items reflected the desire to play sports at the
Item 14 .72 .05 .07 professional/Olympic level. The third factor
was named academic motivation (AM) and
Item 15 .75 .19 .10
had a total of 16 items. The items on this
Item 25 .41 -.01 -.43
subscale represented the extent to which the
Item 27 .67 .30 .15 .86 participants were motivated toward academic
Item 17 -.30 .09 .38 related tasks.
Item 8 .07 .66 -.17
Item 9 .07 .56 .03
Reliability
Item 19 .12 .51 .10 Alpha coefficients were computed to measure
Item 20 .06 .81 -.11
the internal consistency of the items on each
sub-scale. The reliability estimates for each
Item 22 .04 .91 -.01 .84
sub-scale were acceptable. The alpha value for
Item 1 .01 .14 .60
the student athletic motivation sub-scale
Item 3 .07 .11 .70 (Factor 1) was .86. The alpha for the career
Item 4 .00 .15 .79 athletic motivation sub-scale (Factor 2) was
Item 5 -.19 -.19 .54 .84. The alpha for the academic motivation
Item 7 .14 -.11 .43 sub-scale (Factor 3) was .79.
Item 10 .08 -.14 .48 Table 2 illustrates the mean and standard
deviation for each of the three subscales by
Item 11 .07 -.05 .55
gender, race, and sport. Multivariate analysis
Item 17 -.30 .09 .38
of variance was used to examine main effects
Item 18 .10 -.13 .42 of race/ethnicity, gender, and sport on the
Item 21 -.01 .11 .48 three subscales across. The univariate analyses
Item 23 .13 -.02 .54 (all with df = 1, 235) showed that females had
Item 25 .41 -.01 -.43 significantly higher academic motivation
Item 26 .05 -.05 .38 scores than males (F = 8.08, p < .01). Males
Item 28 -.08 .09 .53
had significantly higher student athletic
motivation scores than females (F = 16.64,
Item 29 -.03 -.22 .58
p = .000). Revenue athletes had higher scores
Item 30 .06 -.02 .47 .79
on career athletic motivation than nonrevenue
athletes (F = 3.86, p < .05). Non-White
Note. Oblique Rotation. Maximum Likelihood
Extraction (n = 236). RMSEA = .069, RMSEA athletes had significantly higher career ath-
90% CI (.061, .077).

322 Journal of College Student Development

Research in Brief

letic motivation scores than White athletes higher career athletic motivation score (M =
(F = 33.24, p = .000). 4.70, SD = .972) relative to their academic
Further analysis included examination of motivation score (M = 4.57, SD = .601).
the mean score and standard deviation relative Female athletes were the only group that
to each group. On average, female athletes had exhibited a higher academic motivation score
higher academic motivation (M = 4.72, (M = 4.72, SD = .566) relative to both student
SD = .566) scores than any other group. athletic motivation (M = 4.48, SD = .693)
Additionally, female athletes had the lowest and career athletic motivation (M = 3.44,
score on the career athletic motivation SD = 1.09).
(M = 3.44, SD = 1.09) and student athletic
motivation (M = 4.48, SD = .693) subscales DISCUSSION
than any other group. Minority student
athletes had one of the lowest academic The purpose of this study was to construct a
motivation scores (M = 4.57, SD = .601), a scale to measure academic and athletic
few percentage points greater than only male motivation for student athletes using an
athletes and revenue sport participants. Male expectancy-value theoretical framework. The
student athletes had the highest student results of this study support the use of
athletic motivation score (M = 4.83, expectancy-value as a framework for measuring
SD = .621), followed by revenue sport parti- academic and athletic motivation of college
cipants (M = 4.78, SD = .639) and non-White athletes, and add to the literature concerning
athletes (M = 4.75, SD = .608). Several groups the use of other motivation theories (e.g., self
had lower academic motivation scores relative worth theory) that have been studied pre-
[200.17.203.183] Project MUSE (2025-05-20 12:05 GMT) UFPR-Universidade Federal do Parana

to their student athletic motivation scores. viously (Simons et al., 1999). The SAMSAQ
Male, White, non-White, revenue, and showed good internal consistency in measuring
nonrevenue athletes all had higher student three achievement motivation constructs:
athletic motivation scores than academic (a) academic motivation, (b) student athletic
motivation scores. Non-White athletes had a motivation, and (c) career athletic motivation.

TABLE 2.
Mean and Standard Deviation for Motivation Scores by Gender, Race, and Sport

CAM SAM AM

Variable M SD M SD M SD

Female 3.44 1.090 4.48 .693 4.72 .566

Male 4.14 1.160 4.83 .621 4.52 .622
White 3.57 1.110 4.69 .690 4.60 .615
Non-white 4.70 0.972 4.75 .608 4.57 .601
Non Revenue 3.53 1.030 4.66 .683 4.60 .572
Revenue 4.39 1.190 4.78 .639 4.56 .657

MAY /JUNE 2005 ◆ VOL 46 NO 3 323

Research in Brief

A major finding in this study was that the gives the reader an illustration of how balanced
SAMSAQ measured three motivation con- or unbalanced student athletes were in
structs instead of two. In the original scale, reference to their level of academic and athletic
there were 15 items designed to measure motivation. Female athletes appeared to
academic motivation and 15 items designed present the most balanced group of student
to measure athletic motivation; however the athletes in this study. They had the highest
results of the factor analysis indicated that academic motivation scores among all of the
three constructs were being measured. The groups and their academic motivation scores
hypothesized athletic motivation sub-scale were higher than their career athletic moti-
actually measured two distinct aspects: (a) a vation and student athletic motivation scores.
general desire to pursue athletic related tasks, In other words, female athletes were more
and (b) the desire to pursue a professional motivated toward academic related tasks than
career or an elite level of participation in athletic related tasks.
sports. This finding was unexpected, but To the contrary, non-White and revenue
added a unique dimension to this study. It athletes exhibited the most unbalanced groups
makes sense for the desire to pursue sports at of student athletes in terms of academic and
the professional level to be separated out from athletic motivation. Non-White athletes had
the general desire to play sports by way of self- higher career athletic motivation and student
selecting to participate in a varsity sport. athletic motivation scores relative to their
Moreover, these two aspects are important to academic motivation score. Additionally,
distinguish between in order to better under- revenue sport participants had higher student
stand the academic and athletic experiences athletic motivation scores relative to academic
and expectations of college athletes. motivation. These findings represent a red flag
The findings from this study have impli- for these two groups of student athletes in this
cations for athletic administrators in academic particular study.
support programs, as well as other student
affairs administrators who work with college IMPLICATIONS
athletes on a regular basis. Perhaps the most
meaningful application of the scale might be There are many ways that student affairs
as an assessment of students’ motivation on administrators, particularly academic advisors,
the three subscales. In a study that examined can help student athletes increase their level
the predictive validity of the SAMSAQ, the of academic motivation. Motivated students
results indicated that Academic Motivation are willing to put forth the time and effort to
(AM) was a significant factor in predicting be successful in a given task domain. Cur-
college grade point average (Gaston-Gayles, rently, student athletes spend a great deal of
2004). Therefore, identifying student athletes their time and energy on athletic related tasks.
who score low on the academic motivation Encouraging student athletes to become
subscale and finding ways to increase academic engaged in academic related tasks and out-of-
motivation for these student athletes would class learning experiences will increase the
be the most beneficial use of the scale at this amount of time and energy that student
stage of its development. athletes spend on academic related tasks, thus
Examining the mean scores for each stimulating the creation of a balance between
motivation subscale by gender, race, and sport academics and athletics.

324 Journal of College Student Development

Research in Brief

The literature supports that female academic difficulty could benefit from
athletes have less difficulty balancing academic programming that focuses on reducing test
and athletic tasks, and therefore perform better taking anxiety, effective note taking and study
academically than their male counterparts strategies, as well as other academic success
(Simons et al., 1999; Watt & Moore, 2001). skills that can be learned in an appropriate
This is likely because female athletes are more setting. As student athletes encounter positive
willing and able than other groups of athletes experiences in the academic domain (e.g.,
to transfer the skills that they use to be positive interactions with faculty and peers,
successful in the athletic domain, such as effort passing a quiz or exam) their academic
and time on task, to the academic domain, confidence will likely increase as a result.
perhaps because there are fewer opportunities Along the same line, student athletes
for females to play at the professional level should be encouraged to take responsibility for
(Simons et al.). A number of athletic academic their academic successes and failures. In the
support programs have academic learning same way that athletes analyze a bad game by
specialists who should be involved in helping searching for antecedents for poor per-
student athletes, particularly those deemed formance, they should search for causes for
academically at risk, recognize and use academic failures. Lack of effort, ineffective
transferable skills from the athletic domain to studying, and test anxiety should be discussed
the academic domain. with students who experience academic failure
Previous studies have found that student to avoid reliance on self-disabling excuses and
athletes who aspire to play at the professional the continued development of poor academic
level also have high aspirations to earn a college self-concept. Academic mentors and other
[200.17.203.183] Project MUSE (2025-05-20 12:05 GMT) UFPR-Universidade Federal do Parana

degree (Center for the Study of Athletics, support staff can play an important role in
1988), and that African American and White helping student athletes work through their
athletes do not differ in terms of their desire academic difficulties and ultimately change
to earn a college degree and time spent their behavior and locus of control as a result.
studying (Sellers, 1992). Although these In summary, the findings from this study
athletes exhibited high academic aspirations, support that the SAMSAQ is a valid scale that
they may have been lacking academic self- measures three subscales of motivation. These
confidence in their ability to succeed in three subscales have the potential to provide
academic related tasks. Lack of confidence in academic advisors with information about
academic ability can deter even the most student athletes to help them develop a balance
motivated student from approaching success. between academic and athletic tasks. More
As such, academic advisors and learning research needs to be conducted using the scale
specialists can help student athletes increase with other populations of student athletes to
their confidence in academic related tasks by further validate its usefulness and determine
making better use of study table time. It may how best the scale can be used to enhance
not be most effective to have athletes study academic performance.
together by teams or in large groups. Indi-
vidualized study tables with fewer athletes at Correspondence concerning this article should be
a time might be more appropriate. Addi- addressed to Joy L. Gaston-Gayles, 113P Stone
Building, Tallahassee, FL 32306; [email protected]
tionally, student athletes who experience

MAY /JUNE 2005 ◆ VOL 46 NO 3 325

Research in Brief

APPENDIX.
The SAMSAQ Items

1. I am confident that I can achieve a high grade point average this year (3.0 or above).
2. Achieving a high level of performance in my sport is an important goal for me this year.
3. It is important for me to learn what is taught in my courses.
4. I am willing to put in the time to earn excellent grades in my courses.
5. The most important reason why I am in school is to play my sport.
6. The amount of work required in my courses interferes with my athletic goals.
7. I will be able to use what is taught in my courses in different aspects of my life outside of
school.
8. I chose to play my sport because it is something that I am interested in as a career.
9. I have some doubt about my ability to be a star athlete on my team.
10. I chose (or will choose) my major because it is something I am interested in as a career.
11. Earning a high grade point average (3.0 or above) is not an important goal for me this year.
12. It is important to me to learn the skills and strategies taught by my coaches.
13. It is important for me to do better than other athletes in my sport.
14. The time I spend engaged in my sport is enjoyable to me.
15. It is worth the effort to be an exceptional athlete in my sport.
16. Participation in my sport interferes with my progress towards earning a college degree.
17. I get more satisfaction from earning an “A” in a course toward my major than winning a game
in my sport.
18. During the years I compete in my sport, completing a college degree is not a goal for me.
19. I am confident that I can be a star performer on my team this year.
20. My goal is to make it to the professional level or the Olympics in my sport.
21. I have some doubt about my ability to earn high grades in some of my courses.
22. I am confident that I can make it to an elite level in my sport (Professional/Olympics).
23. I am confident that I can earn a college degree.
24. I will be able to use the skills I learn in my sport in other areas of my life outside of sports.
25. I get more satisfaction from winning a game in my sport than from getting an “A” in a course
toward my major.
26. It is not important for me to perform better than other students in my courses.
27. I am willing to put in the time to be outstanding in my sport.
28. The content of most of my courses is interesting to me.
29. The most important reason why I am in school is to earn a degree.
30. It is not worth the effort to earn excellent grades in my courses.

Note. Copyright 2002 by Joy L. Gaston: May be used for research with permission. Each item is rated on a
scale of 1 to 6 with 1 = very strongly disagree, 2 = strongly disagree, 3 = disagree, 4 = agree,
5 = strongly agree, and 6 = very strongly agree. The CAM subscale consists of items 8, 9, 19, 20, and
22. The SAM subscale consisted of items 2, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 25, and 27. The AM subscale items
consisted of items 1, 3, 4, 5(reversed), 7, 10, 11, 17, 18, 21, 23, 25(reversed), 26, 28, 29, and 30.

326 Journal of College Student Development

Research in Brief

REFERENCES
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory Purdy, D. A., Eitzen, D. S., & Hufnagel, R. (1985). Are
of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. athletes also students? The educational attainment of college
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: athletes. In D. Chu, J. O. Segrave, & B. J. Becker (Eds.),
A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Sport and Higher Education (pp. 221-234). Champaign, IL:
Hall. Human Kinetics.
Bowen, W. G., & Levin, S. A. (2003). Reclaiming the game: Sedlacek, W. E., & Adams-Gaston, J. (1992). Predicting the
College sports and educational values. Princeton, NJ: academic success of student-athletes using SAT and
Princeton University Press. noncognitive variables. Journal of Counseling & Develop-
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of ment, 70, 724-727.
assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, Sellers, R. M. (1992). Racial differences in the predictors for
230-258. academic achievement of student-athletes in Division I
Browne, M. W., Cudeck, R., Tateneni, K. & Mels, G. (1999). revenue producing sports. Sociology of Sport Journal, 9,
CEFA: Comprehensive exploratory factor analysis (version 48-60.
1.03) [www document and computer program]. Retrieved Silva III, J. M., & Weinberg, R. S. (Eds.). (1984). Psychological
October 14, 2001, from http://quantrm2.psy.ohio- foundations of sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
state.edu/browne Simons, H. D., Van Rheenen, D., & Covington, M. V. (1999).
Center for the Study of Athletics. (1988). Report No. 1: Academic motivation and the student athlete. Journal of
Summary results from the 1987-88 national study of College Student Development, 40(2), 151-162.
intercollegiate athletes. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes Snyder, P. L. (1996). Comparative levels of expressed academic
for Research. motivation among Anglo and African American university
Eccles, J. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. student-athletes. Journal of Black Studies, 26, 651-667.
In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and Sociological Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1983). Achievement-related
Approaches (pp. 76-138). San Francisco: W.H. Freeman. motives and behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.). Achievement
Ervin, L., Saunders, S. A., Gillis, H. L., & Hogrebe, M. C. and Sociological Approaches (pp. 7-68). San Francisco: W.H.
(1985). Academic performance of student athletes in Freeman.
revenue producing sports. Journal of College Student Tracey, T. J., & Sedlacek, W. E. (1984). Noncognitive variables
Personnel, 26, 119-125. in predicting academic success by race. Measurement and
Gaston, J. L. (2002). A study of student athletes’ motivation Evaluation in Guidance, 16, 171-178.
toward sports and academics. Unpublished doctoral Tracey, T. J., & Sedlacek, W. E. (1985). The relationship of
dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus. noncongnitive variables to academic success: A longitudinal
Gaston-Gayles, J. L. (2004). Examining academic and athletic comparison by race. Journal of College Student Personnel,
motivation among student athletes at a Division I university, 26, 405-410.
Journal of College Student Development, 45(1), 75-83. Watt, S. K., & Moore, J. L. (2001). Who are student athletes?
Graham, S. (1991). A review of attribution theory in In M. F. Howard-Hamilton & S. K. Watt (Eds.), Student
achievement contexts. Educational Psychology Review, 3, services for student athletes. New Directions for Student
5-39. Services, no. 93. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2003). 1999-00- Weiner, B. (1984). Human motivation: Metaphors, theories, and
2001-02 Student-Athletic ethnicity report. IN: Author. research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Petrie, T. A., & Stoever, S. (1997). Academic and nonacademic Young, B. D., & Sowa, C. J. (1992). Predictors of academic
predictors of female student-athletes’ academic perfor- success for Black student athletes. Journal of College Student
mances. Journal of College Student Development, 38(6), Development, 33(4), 318-324.
599-608.

MAY /JUNE 2005 ◆ VOL 46 NO 3 327