Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
Medical Education Unit, College of Medicine and Medical Sciences, Arabian Gulf University, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain Department of Medical Education, Royal College of Surgeons of Ireland (RCSI), Bahrain
2
Medical Education Unit, College of Medicine and Medical Sciences, Arabian Gulf University, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain Department of Physiology, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
3
Department of Family and Community Medicine, College of Medicine and Medical Sciences, Arabian Gulf University, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain
4
Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine and Medical Sciences, Arabian Gulf University, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain
5
Department of Anatomy, College of Medicine and Medical Sciences, Arabian Gulf University, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Demanding careers like medicine requires a lot of motivation and the Academic
Motivation Scale (AMS) developed by Vallerand et al. (1992) is an instrument to measure motivation.
This study evaluated the validity and reliability of AMS among medical students in the Middle East.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a methodological research utilizing a convenient sampling
technique. AMS scale comprising 28 items subdivided into seven subscales was administered to 900
students (281 students returned the filled AMS). Data were analyzed using the descriptive statistics,
one‑way ANOVA, and t‑tests. Exploratory factor analysis and Cronbach’s alpha were used to evaluate
the validity and reliability of the scale, respectively.
RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference between both genders in overall
scores (P = 0.015*), two subscales, namely “Identified Regulation” (P =0.017*) and “Stimulating
Experience” (P = 0.015*), with females showing higher value. Second‑year students (n = 91) had
significantly higher score (10.9 ± 4.1) for “Amotivation” (P =.001*) and first‑year students (n = 48)
had significantly higher score (16.2 ± 3.0) for “Achievement” subscale (P =.014*). P < 0.05
was considered statistically significant with 95% confidence interval. No statistically significant
difference was observed between the groups based on nationality or age. Bartlett’s test of
sphericity was significant (Chi‑square: 2988.010; df = 278; P < 0.001). Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin
was 0.890. Principal component analysis with varimax rotation extracted seven factors
corresponding to the original items of AMS questionnaire. All subscales correlated positively
except “amotivation.” Structural equation modeling revealed the relation between observed
and unobserved variables.
DISCUSSION: This study demonstrated that AMS is valid and reliable for application among Middle
East medical students, without needing any modification. AMS has widespread application in medical
education as it impacts learning outcomes.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that AMS is valid and reliable for application among the
Middle East students without needing any modification.
Keywords