IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/spomar/v8y2005i1p69-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Feasibility of Single-Item Measures in Sport Loyalty Research

Author

Listed:
  • Kwon, Hyungil
  • Trail, Galen

Abstract

Researchers in disciplines other than sport have attempted to make a case for single-item measures of cognitive and affective dimensions in instances when simplicity, brevity, or global measurement is of paramount importance. This study compared and contrasted two separate multiple-item measures to two single-item measures referent to two specified constructs: (1) affective commitment to a team, represented by the Psychological Commitment to Team scale, and (2) team identification represented by the Team Identification Index. Data were collected from 146 college students (72 men and 74 women) at a large American university. It was determined that multiple-item scales had the advantage of breadth of measurement and scale, and that single-item scales had the advantage of simplicity and brevity or ease of use. The study also examined one of the greatest criticisms of single-item measures and one of the greatest advantages of the multiple-item scales: reliability and concurrent validity. The Team Identification Index had better reliability (0.92 vs. 0.83) but explained less variance in behavioural items than its referent single-item measure. The Psychological Commitment to Team had better reliability (0.96 vs. 0.90) and explained more variance than its referent single-item measure. In general, all single-item measures should be tested before use and only used in certain circumstances. Specifically for the Team Identification Index and the Psychological Commitment to Team scale, sport marketers may be able to use the referent single-item measures in certain situations.

Suggested Citation

  • Kwon, Hyungil & Trail, Galen, 2005. "The Feasibility of Single-Item Measures in Sport Loyalty Research," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 69-88, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:spomar:v:8:y:2005:i:1:p:69-88
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441352305700334
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gao, Yanan & Rasouli, Soora & Timmermans, Harry & Wang, Yuanqing, 2018. "Trip stage satisfaction of public transport users: A reference-based model incorporating trip attributes, perceived service quality, psychological disposition and difference tolerance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 759-775.
    2. Pan, Mengyang & Hill, James & Blount, Ian & Rungtusanatham, Manus, 2022. "Relationship building and minority business growth: Does participating in activities sponsored by institutional intermediaries help?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 830-843.
    3. Sarstedt, Marko & Diamantopoulos, Adamantios & Salzberger, Thomas, 2016. "Should we use single items? Better not," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 3199-3203.
    4. Sarstedt, Marko & Diamantopoulos, Adamantios & Salzberger, Thomas & Baumgartner, Petra, 2016. "Selecting single items to measure doubly concrete constructs: A cautionary tale," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 3159-3167.
    5. Anand Nair & Cigdem Ataseven & Marco Habermann & David Dreyfus, 2016. "Toward a continuum of measurement scales in Just-in-Time (JIT) research – an examination of the predictive validity of single-item and multiple-item measures," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 35-48, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:spomar:v:8:y:2005:i:1:p:69-88. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/716936/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.