The development of the Sport Commitment Questionnaire-2 (English version) Tara K. Scanlan a, * , Graig M. Chow a, b , Catarina Sousa a, c , Larry A. Scanlan a , Casey A. Knifsend a, d a Department of Psychology, UCLA, USA b Department of Educational Psychology and Learning Systems, Florida State University, USA c Department of Psychology, Universidad Aut onoma de Barcelona, Spain d Department of Psychology, California State University, Sacramento, USA article info Article history: Received 24 March 2015 Received in revised form 5 August 2015 Accepted 5 August 2015 Available online 7 August 2015 Keywords: Constrained Commitment Enthusiastic Commitment mixed-methods research Sport Commitment Model Sport Enjoyment abstract Objectives: The purpose of this research was to develop the Sport Commitment Questionnaire-2 (SCQ-2) and establish its psychometric properties. The SCQ-2 measures the updated Sport Commitment Model (SCM: Scanlan, Russell, Scanlan, Klunchoo, & Chow, 2013) and replaces the outdated Sport Commitment Questionnaire (SCQ) that assessed the original SCM (Scanlan, Simons, Carpenter, Schmidt, & Keeler, 1993). Design: Based on prior commitment research, items were generated to refine and expand the original SCQ subscales and to measure new candidate constructs to the SCM. A multiphase study was then conducted. Methods: Phase 1 participants were 753 male/female adolescent athletes (ages 13e19 years) from six sports representing varying levels of task interdependence. Using similar methodology as Phase 1, Phase 2 assessed 982 male/female adolescent athletes. Results: Exploratory factor analysis of Phase 1 data revealed 13 factors: two types of commitment (Enthusiastic and Constrained) and 11 sources. Confirmatory factor analysis of Phase 2 data supported a 58-item, 12-factor structure. In addition, all subscales were internally consistent. Structural equation modeling revealed that the sources explained 81.8% of the variance in Enthusiastic Commitment and 63.9% in Constrained Commitment. Conclusions: The SCQ-2 assesses the sources and types of commitment in the updated SCM. Based on several indices of fit and the composite reliabilities, psychometric support for the SCQ-2 was established. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. One significant way to move the science and practice forward in any field is to develop effective measurement tools. The primary objective of this project was to produce a sound, up to date, ecologically valid assessment instrument to advance research in sport commitment and for use as an intervention aid by applied sport psychologists. To this end, we have added to the existing knowledge base in two ways. First, we have updated and refined our previous quantitative instrument to assess the new Sport Commitment Model (SCM) with its significant additions and re- finements to the original theoretical model of sport commitment. Second, through the process of quantifying the model constructs using what we have learned in our qualitative interview research, we have sharpened the assessment and deepened the under- standing of commitment. The specific purpose of this research was to develop the Sport Commitment Questionnaire-2 (SCQ-2) and establish its psycho- metric properties. The SCQ-2 measures the updated SCM and re- places the first Sport Commitment Questionnaire (SCQ) developed almost 25 years ago. The project used a multiphase design and studied two separate, and large heterogeneous samples of adoles- cent athletes. The SCQ-2 includes 13 subscales, consisting of two types of psychological commitment and 11 sources. Benefitting from the quantitative studies of many scientists and our mixed-methods research, the SCQ-2 captures the commitment process in a more * Corresponding author. Department of Psychology, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA. E-mail address: scanlan@psych.ucla.edu (T.K. Scanlan). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Psychology of Sport and Exercise journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/psychsport http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.002 1469-0292/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Psychology of Sport and Exercise 22 (2016) 233e246