Coaching competency and (exploratory) structural equation modeling: A substantive-methodological synergy

• ESEM should be strongly considered in subsequent validity studies.
• Level of a priori measurement theory is a key for deciding between ESEM and CFA.
• Fig. 2 and 3s provide measurement models for use in future research.

ObjectivesThe purpose of this manuscript was to provide a substantive-methodological synergy of potential importance to future research in the psychology of sport and exercise.DesignThe substantive focus was the emerging role for, and particularly the measurement of, athletes' evaluations of their coach's competency within conceptual models of effective coaching. The methodological focus was exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), a methodology that integrates the advantages of exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) within the general structural equation model.MethodsThe synergy was a demonstration of when a new and flexible methodological framework, ESEM, may be preferred as compared to a more familiar and restrictive methodological framework, CFA, by reanalyzing existing data.ResultsESEM analysis on extant datasets suggested that for responses to the Athletes' Perceptions of Coaching Competency Scale II – High School Teams (APCCS II-HST), a CFA model based on the relevant literature plus one post hoc modification, offered a viable alternative to a more complex ESEM model. For responses to the Coaching Competency Scale (CCS), a CFA model based on the relevant literature did not offer a viable alternative to a more complex ESEM model.ConclusionsThe ESEM framework should be strongly considered in subsequent studies validity studies - for new and/or existing instruments in the psychology of sport and exercise. A key consideration for deciding between ESEM and the accompanying rotation criterion and CFA in future validity studies should be level of a priori measurement theory.