Initial Evaluation of the Internal Structure and Internal Consistency of the Context-Adapted Perceived Peer...

Background/Objectives: Peer motivational climate may influence how students experience collaboration and learning in group-based educational settings, but its measurement properties have not been examined in nursing students enrolled in clinical simulation programs. The Perceived Peer Motivational Climate Scale (CMI) was originally developed in sport contexts, and its psychometric properties in this educational context have not been examined. Therefore, this study aimed to conduct an initial evaluation of the internal structure and internal consistency of a context-adapted CMI among nursing students enrolled in a clinical simulation program. Methods: A cross-sectional psychometric study was conducted with 395 fourth-year undergraduate nursing students at the Catholic University of Murcia (UCAM) who voluntarily agreed to participate, using a convenience sampling approach. The questionnaire was completed before the scheduled clinical simulation activities. Participants had previous experience with group work in clinical simulations, and the items referred to the peer group assigned to the upcoming simulation. However, it was not established whether all participants had previously interacted with those specific peers. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients for the task-involving and ego-involving motivational climate dimensions. The internal structure was examined using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) based on a polychoric correlation matrix, minimum residual extraction, and oblimin rotation, followed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using the diagonally weighted least squares (DWLS) estimator for ordinal categorical variables. Both the EFA and CFA were conducted in the same sample. Results: The CMI demonstrated high internal consistency for both dimensions, with Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients of 0.939 for the task-involving dimension and 0.940 for the ego-involving dimension. Exploratory factor analysis was consistent with a two-factor structure, supported by parallel analysis, with items showing clear primary loadings and limited cross-loadings. Confirmatory factor analysis showed substantially better fit for the correlated two-factor model than for the one-factor model (estimator-adjusted Δχ²(1) = 126, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.991; TLI = 0.987; SRMR = 0.049), although the RMSEA remained elevated at 0.130 (95% CI 0.114 to 0.147). The two factors were positively correlated (r = 0.681). Conclusions: The CMI showed high estimated internal consistency and preliminary evidence consistent with a correlated two-factor structure in this sample of fourth-year nursing students enrolled in a clinical simulation program. These findings should be interpreted within the context of a single-institution convenience sample, the use of the same sample for EFA and CFA, and the absence of formal content-validity procedures in the target population. The study did not assess other sources of validity evidence, such as temporal stability, criterion-related validity, measurement invariance, or sensitivity to change. The generalizability of these findings beyond fourth-year nursing students at a single Spanish university participating in the specified simulation program remains uncertain. Further research using independent and more diverse samples, together with formal content-validity procedures and additional sources of validity evidence, is needed to replicate and extend these findings before broader use of the instrument can be considered.