Development and validation of a scale on exercise risk of university students

This study aims to develop a scale to assess exercise-related risk among university students and to evaluate its reliability and validity. The development of the scale was conducted in two stages. In the first stage, a preliminary version of the scale was formulated based on the conceptual framework of Social Combustion Theory, through a comprehensive literature review, research group discussions, Delphi expert consultations, and pilot testing. In the second stage, university students from higher education institutions in Sichuan Province were selected using a simple random sampling method to examine the reliability and validity of the scale. The developed exercise risk scale comprised three dimensions: Participant risk, Sports environment risk, and Organizational management risk, with a total of 23 items. The overall content validity index of the scale was 0.89, while the item-level content validity indices ranged from 0.83 to 1.00. Exploratory factor analysis extracted three common factors, accounting for a cumulative variance contribution of 65.54%. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated an acceptable model fit, with a chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio of 2.94, an incremental fit index (IFI) of 0.94, a comparative fit index (CFI) of 0.94, and a root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) of 0.07. The scale demonstrated good internal consistency, with Cronbach’s α coefficients ranging from 0.82 to 0.96 across the three dimensions. However, convergent validity evidence was limited for Participant risk and Sports environment risk (AVE = 0.43 and 0.45, respectively). The 23-item scale comprises three dimensions: Participant risk, Sports environment risk, and Organizational management risk. The findings provide preliminary support for its internal consistency and three-factor structure. Further validation in independent and diverse populations is needed given the lack of independent validation of the modified model and remaining limitations in convergent and discriminant validity.