Construct Validity Studies of a Group Development Measurement Scale (EDG-D)

Abstract

The Integrated Model of Group Development (MIDG), proposed by Miguez and Lourenço (2001), fits into the hybrid category of group development models (Smith, 2001). The model, includes elements from linear – the progression from dependence towards interdependence – cyclical – the psychodynamic perspective of several influencing energies throughout group's developmental process – and polar models – the unceasing tension between the two subsystems that are part of it. The model places its foundations at two equally important subsystems – socio-affective and task – and conceives group development through the course of four stages: Structuring, Reframing, Restructuring and Realization. Each of the subsystems intervenes chiefly in the two earlier or latter stages, respectively, while keeping influential along the way to varying degrees. Group Development Scale – Sport (or EDG-D) is a self-response instrument based on the MIDG, built to measure group development on sports teams. EDG-D uses a self-response 7-point Likert-scale and includes 36 items (9 per stage) measuring central group processes (e.g., communication, conflict, cohesion, clarity of objectives). The original construct validation studies of N. Pinto (2012) lead to the emergence of a three dimensional scale, contrasting to the four stages initially proposed by MIDG: first and second stages corresponded fittingly; thirds and fourth stages, however, emerged grouped together. The present study further tests the psychometric attributes of the scale with a new sample of 54 sports teams (N = 566). Through confirmatory factor analysis we tested the four-stage model (conceptual model) against the three-stage model (emergent model). The scale proved again to fit a three-stage model better, showing very robust psychometric qualities. Subsequent analytical procedures, including a measurement of invariance, with the same set of data, collected at two different moments along the sports season, further confirmed ascertained results. The final version comprising 27 items showed to be a valid and reliable group development assessment instrument. The results are convergent with a number of previous studies and are discussed in the group development theory framework.