Similar but different: Profiling secondary school students based on their perceived motivational climate and psychological need-based experiences in physical education

represented the construct best, and then conferred to reach consensus on which items to retain. In the resulting questionnaire, the stem ‘In general during PE-lessons. . .’ was followed by three items reflecting autonomy satisfaction (e.g., ‘I feel a sense of choice and freedom in the things I undertake’), autonomy frustration (e.g., ‘I feel forced to do many things I wouldn’t choose to do’), competence satisfaction (e.g., ‘I feel confident that I can do things well’), com- petence frustration (e.g., ‘I have serious doubts about whether I can do things well’), related- ness satisfaction (e.g., ‘I feel close and connected with other people who are important to me’) and relatedness frustration (e.g., ‘I feel excluded from the group I want to belong’). The item- set was tested for usability and language suitability in a pilot study (N = 10). All items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (‘not at all true for me’) to 5 (‘very true for me’). Cronbach’s Alpha scores were calculated for each construct (see Table 1). Perceived mastery and performance climate. Students’ perceived teacher-initiated moti- vational climate during PE-lessons throughout the whole school year was measured by a modi- fied version of the Motivational Climate Scale for Youth Sports (MCSYS) [55]. The item-set was tested for usability and language suitability in a pilot study (N = 10). Students responded to the items on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (‘not at all true for me’) to 5 (‘very true for me’). Total scores for each scale were computed by averaging across the items. The MCSYS

is based on the content of the Perceived Motivational Climate in Sport-2 (PMCSQ-2) [56] and wording was slightly adapted to the PE context. It consists of six items indexing a mastery cli- mate (e.g., ‘The PE teacher told us that trying our best was the most important thing’) and six items assessing a performance climate (e.g., ‘The PE teacher told us to try to be better than our teammates’). The MCSYS is age-appropriate for the present sample and has demonstrated good internal consistency for each subscale (> .70) and adequate test-retest reliability (.84 for mastery, .76 for ego) [55]. The internal consistencies of the modified questionnaire were satisfactory with Cronbach’s Alpha’s of .87, and .79 for subscale mastery (task-involving) climate and performance (ego- involving) climate respectively (see Table 1). Constructs and variables used to describe profiles. To interpret, describe and compare the emerging profiles, demographic variables, motivational variables and PE-related variables were used. The demographic variables consisted of gender and age. The motivational variables were achievement goal orientation and motivational regulation. The PE-related variables con- cerned students’ general valuation of PE and leisure time sport participation (LTSP). Achievement Goal Orientation. The validated 2x2 Achievement Goal in Physical Educa- tion Questionnaire (2x2 AGPEQ) [14] was used to measure the achievement goal orientation of students in the context of PE. The 12-item scale reflects the four achievement goals (3 items

each): mastery-approach goal (e.g., ‘I want to learn as much as possible from PE class’), mas- tery-avoidance goal (e.g., ‘I worry that I may not learn all that I possibly could in PE class’), Table 1. Overview and descriptive statistics of motivational constructs used for profiles. Motivational construct Items α n Mean Min Max SD Autonomy satisfaction 3 .75 2,562 3.17 3.01 3.27 .80 Autonomy frustration 3 .77 2,562 2.49 2.27 2.76 .91 Competence satisfaction 3 .83 2,562 3.44 3.28 3.52 .81 Competence frustration 3 .84 2,562 2.24 2.19 2.30 .92 Relatedness satisfaction 3 .75 2,562 3.78 3.68 3.93 .79 Relatedness frustration 3 .70 2,562 1.90 1.79 2.12 .72 Mastery climate 6 .87 2,562 3.84 3.65 4.13 .70 Performance climate 6 .79 2,562 2.13 1.87 2.35 .70 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228859.t001 Similar but different PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228859 February 10, 2020 5 / 17