Skip to main content

Development and Validation of a Barriers to Physical Activity Scale for Adults with Visual Impairments


Research indicates that individuals with visual impairments tend not to meet the physical activity guidelines for health promotion. Existing literature has identified barriers to physical activity as having the potential to impact the physical activity engagement of this population. Most studies of barriers to physical activity among populations with visual impairments have used instruments developed for other groups. However, scholars within the field of adapted physical activity recommended the development and use of instruments designed to address the needs and characteristics of specific disability groups. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to develop and validate a brief scale designed to measure the magnitude of barriers to physical activity for use among adults with visual impairments. The instrument was developed in four phases: (a) item development, (b) content validity, (c) exploratory factor analysis, and (d) confirmatory factor analysis. Factor analyses yielded 12 items across three barrier factors (i.e., accessibility, personal, and transportation). The Barriers to Physical Activity for Adults with Visual Impairment scale is a valid and reliable measure of barriers to physical activity for this population.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1


  1. Arem, H., Moore, S. C., Patel, A., Hartge, P., De Gonzalez, A. B., Visvanathan, K., et al. (2015). Leisure time physical activity and mortality: A detailed pooled analysis of the dose-response relationship. JAMA Internal Medicine, 175(6), 959–967.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cardinal, B. J., Kang, M., Farnsworth, J. L., & Welk, G. J. (2015). Historical context and current status of the intersection of physical activity and public health: Results of the 2015 American kinesiology Association’s opportunities for kinesiology survey. Kinesiology Review, 4(4), 329–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Carroll, D. D., Courtney-Long, E. A., Stevens, A. C., Sloan, M. L., Lullo, C., Visser, S. N., et al. (2014). Vital signs: Disability and physical activity—United States, 2009–2012. Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, 63(18), 407–413.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). State indicator report on physical activity, 2014. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Choi, B. C. K., & Pak, A. W. P. (2005). A catalog of biases in questionnaires. Preventing Chronic Disease, 2(1), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  8. De Winter, J., Dodou, D., & Wieringa, P. (2009). Exploratory factor analysis with small sample sizes. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44(2), 147–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 328–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Guadagnoli, E., & Velicer, W. F. (1988). Relation to sample size to the stability of component patterns. Psychological Bulletin, 103(2), 265–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hartge, P., & Cahill, J. (1998). Field methods in epidemiology. Modern epidemiology (2nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Holbrook, E. A., Caputo, J. L., Perry, T. L., Fuller, D. K., & Morgan, D. W. (2009). Physical activity, body composition, and perceived quality of life of adults with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 103(1), 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Holbrook, E. A., Kang, M., & Morgan, D. W. (2013). Acquiring a stable estimate of physical activity in adults with visual impairment. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 30(1), 59–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modeling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Jaarsma, E. A., Dekker, R., Koopmans, S. A., Dijkstra, P. U., & Geertzen, J. H. (2014). Barriers to and facilitators of sports participation in people with visual impairments. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 31(3), 240–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kirk, T, N., & Haegele, J, A. (in press). Expectancy-value beliefs, identity, and physical activity among adults with visual impairments. Disability & Rehabilitation, 1–9.

  18. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Law, M., Petrenchik, T., King, G., & Hurley, P. (2007). Perceived environmental barriers to recreational, community, and school participation for children and youth with physical disabilities. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 88(12), 1636–1642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee, M., Zhu, W., Ackley-Holbrook, E., Brower, D. G., & McMurray, B. (2014). Calibration and validation of the physical activity barrier scale for persons who are blind or visually impaired. Disability & Health Journal, 7(3), 309–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Marmeleira, J., Laranjo, L., Marques, O., & Pereira, C. (2014). Physical activity patterns in adults who are blind as assessed by accelerometry. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 31(3), 283–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mundfrom, D. J., Shaw, D. G., & Ke, T. L. (2005). Minimum sample size recommendations for conducting factor analyses. International Journal of Testing, 5(2), 159–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Preston, C. C., & Colman, A. M. (2000). Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: Reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences. Acta Psychologica, 104(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Revilla, M. A., Saris, W. E., & Krosnick, J. A. (2014). Choosing the number of categories in agree–disagree scales. Sociological Methods & Research, 43(1), 73–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rimmer, J. H., Riley, B., Wang, E., Rauworth, A., & Jurkowski, J. (2004). Physical activity participation among persons with disabilities: Barriers and facilitators. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 26(5), 419–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Shaw, A. C., Flack, A., Smale, B., & Gold, D. (2012). Finding a way to participate: Physical activity, constraints, and strategies. Insight, 5(3), 139–153.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Smith, B., & Perrier, M.-J. (2014). Disability, sport, and impaired bodies. In R. J. Schinke & K. R. McGannon (Eds.), The psychology of sub-culture in sport and physical activity. London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Starkoff, B. E., Lenz, E. K., Lieberman, L. J., Foley, J., & Too, D. (2017). Physical activity patterns of adults with visual impairments. British Journal of Visual Impairment, 35(2), 130–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. United States Association of Blind Athletes [USABA] (2013). IBSA visual classifications. Retrieved March 14, 2019, from

  32. Warburton, D. E., Nicol, C. W., & Bredin, S. S. (2006). Health benefits of physical activity: The evidence. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 174(6), 801–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


The authors would like to acknowledge support provided by the School of Kinesiology at the University of Michigan and by the United States Office of Special Education Program training grant H325D160032.


This work did not receive funding support.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. N. Kirk.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures were reviewed by and found to be in compliance with the standards of the second and third authors’ human subjects research institutional review board prior to data collection and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

All participants furnished informed consent prior to participating in this study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kirk, T.N., Haegele, J.A. & Zhu, X. Development and Validation of a Barriers to Physical Activity Scale for Adults with Visual Impairments. J Dev Phys Disabil 33, 963–976 (2021).

Download citation


  • Exercise
  • Health promotion
  • Disability
  • Blindness