Table 2. Psychological assessment tools of factors with neutral or positive association with sports injury treatment outcomes.
Category Scale Name and Acronym Factor assessed Length Reliability: internal consistency (Cronbach Alpha) Other useful information
Personality traits Minnesota Multiphasic
Personality Inventory (MMPI) (Hathaway and McKinley, 1940)
Revised to MMPI-2
(Hathaway et al., 1989)
Personality profile across 10 clinical scales 567 items (MMPI-2) 0.75-0.92 Administration takes 30 minutes or longer. MMPI-2 has replaced the MMPI for routine clinical or
research use. Specialised software needed for
scoring; not available without trained provider
Personality traits Swedish Universities
Scales of Personality SSP (Gustavsson et al., 2000)
Survey of personality traits including
optimism &
91 items 0.59 for social
0.74-0.84 all
other subscales
Divided into 13 scales including somatic trait
anxiety, impulsiveness, adventure seeking, revised version of Karolinska Scales of Personality,
embitterment score; was correlated with outcomes in ACLRs (Swirtun and Renström, 2008)
Self-motivation ACL Return to Sport after Injury Scale (ACL-RSI)
(Webster et al., 2008)
Perceived ability and motivation to return to sport 12 items 0.92 Created around psychological response to sport
resumption: emotions, confidence in performance, and risk appraisal(Langford et al., 2009)
Self-motivation Self-motivation
Inventory (SMI)
(Dishman and Ickes, 1981)
Self-motivation to complete a task 40 items 0.91 Self-motivation was a large predictor of physical therapy adherence (Brewer et al., 2000) Originally validated in patients who were prescribed
therapeutic exercise (Dishman and Ickes, 1981).
Self-motivation Psychovitality
(Gobbi and
Francisco, 2006)
Motivation and perceived likelihood to return to sport after injury 6 items No reported
Used in two studies study only
(Gobbi and Francisco, 2006;
Zaffagnini et al., 2008)
Coping Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ)
(Hayes et al., 2004)
9 items 0.70 Relatively insensitive to change with intervention The AAQ includes items such as “I am able to take action on a problem even if I am uncertain what is the right thing to do,” and “my thoughts and feelings get in the way of my success”. AAQ average scores of 42 and 38 represent the upper quartile of experiential
avoidance in clinical and non-clinical samples,
respectively (Hayes et al., 2004).
Coping Brief Coping
Orientations to the Problem Experience (Brief COPE) inventory (Carver, 1997)
Coping methods Full version:
60 items
version: 28
0.72-0.84 Measures across 2 domains: problem-focused
coping and emotion-coping. Sample items include “I get upset and let my emotions out.” Test-retest stability has been demonstrated at 1 and 2-year
follow-up(Cooper et al., 2008).
Athletic identity Athletic Identity
Measurement Scale
(AIMS) (Brewer and Cornelius, 2001)
Athletic self-
identity (a source
of social support among athletes)
10 items 0.81 Predictive of post-injury psychological distress(Brewer and Cornelius, 2001)
Optimism Life Orientation
Test-Revised (LOT-R)
(Scheier et al., 1994)
differences in
optimism versus pessimism
10 items 0.78 Used extensively in behavioral, affective and health research. The LOT-R has demonstrated convergent and discriminant validity in comparison to measures of mastery, anxiety, self-esteem, and personality. Scheier and colleagues have reported LOT-R norms of 14.33 (SD = 4.28) in college students and 15.16 (4.05) in cardiac bypass patients (Scheier et al., 1994).
Optimism Illness Perception
(IPQ-R) (Moss-Morris
et al., 2002)
Measure cognitive and emotional

84 items
0.67-0.89 for
8 dimensions: identity, timeline, consequences,
personal control, treatment control, illness coherence, cyclical timeline, emotional representation.
Test-retest stability at follow-up ranging from 3 weeks to 6 months (Moss-Morris et al., 2002).
Self Efficacy Sports Injury
Rehabilitation Beliefs
Survey (SIRBS)
(Taylor and May,
Assesses health
beliefs as well as level of sports
importance of sport to the athlete

19 items
0.52 (severity
– 0.91 (self
Subscales in susceptibility, severity, self-efficacy, and treatment efficacy. Respondents rate the degree to which they agree with statements such as “Being fully recovered from injury is extremely important to me”, and “In order to prevent a recurrence of this injury, my rehabilitation program is essential”
Self Efficacy Modified Self-Efficacy for Rehabilitation
Outcome Scale (SER)
(Waldrop et al., 2001)
Perceived ability
to perform tasks during injury
12 items 0.94 Respondents rate the degree to which they are certain about their ability to perform rehabilitation-related tasks (e.g., “I believe I can do my therapy regardless of the amount of pain I am experiencing”).
Demonstrated convergent validity with Functional Independence Measure (FIM), the Life Orientation Test (LOT), and the Perceived Health Competence Scale (PHCS)(Waldrop et al., 2001)
Self Efficacy Knee Self-Efficacy Scale (K-SES) (Thomee et al., 2006) Perceived ability
to perform knee-related tasks
22 items 0.78-0.94 for
Four scale subsections. Measures both present self-efficacy and perceived future self-efficacy.
Respondents report the degree to which they are
certain about items/statements such as “Jumping sideways from one leg to another”, and “How certain are you that your knee will not break”