Table 1

Descriptive analysis, composite reliability, and latent correlations between the study variables

Variables

M (SD)

1. Sex

4.17 (0.54)

–

.16*

–0.01

–.06

–.02

.16*

.09

–.16*

–.12

.05

–.25**

2. Grade

4.41 (0.53)

–

–.13

–.28**

–.43**

.15*

–22*

.26**

–.42**

–.32**

–.04

–.25**

3. Autonomy satisfaction

4.59 (0.40)

.70

–

.36*

.44**

–.58**

–.22*

–.24*

.28*

–.14

–.27*

.31*

4. Competence satisfaction

1.84 (0.56)

.60

–

.38*

–.32*

–.65**

–.42**

.71**

.29**

–.25

.44**

5. Relatedness satisfaction

1.66 (0.57)

.73

–

–.27*

–.39**

–.79**

.55**

.13

–.22*

.46**

6. Autonomy frustration

1.67 (0.55)

.72

–

.40**

.39**

–.39**

.11

.43**

–.26*

7. Competence frustration

4.41 (0.48)

.70

–

.57**

–.49**

–.24*

.36**

–.37**

8. Relatedness frustration

2.87 (1.04)

.71

–

–.43**

.19*

.38**

–.23*

9. Autonomous motivation

1.26 (0.36)

.82

–

.27**

–.49**

.57**

10. Controlled motivation

6.33 (0.72)

.81

–

.33**

.11

11. Amotivation

28.8 % (15)

.60

–

–.43**

12. Physical activity intent

28.8 % (15)

.68

–

Note: The correlations were significant at levels where p < .05* and p < .01**. Pearson correlations are shown, with the exception of the variable grade, for which Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was used.

Back to article