Because of these advantages, it was decided to adapt the AEQ-A for use in a Peruvian student population.
As a preliminary step to adapting the instrument, a series of four focus group discussions among university students were organized to explore whether the expectancies contained in the AEQ-A were recognizable among Peruvian students (Chau & Van den Broucke, submitted).
In accordance with other studies adapting the AEQ-A (Aas, 1993), the items were scored on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = rather disagree, 4 = rather agree, 5 = strongly agree), instead of the original true/false format.
Cases with missing data on the AEQ-A were excluded from the analyses, resulting in an effective sample size of 672.
To investigate whether the seven scales of the original AEQ-A could be reproduced in the Peruvian sample, a principal component analysis was performed on the data, with the number of components to be extracted fixed at 7.
Based on these analyses, it was concluded that while the original structure of the AEQ-A could not be reproduced in our sample, there is sufficient evidence for a stable three-component structure, measuring positive personal and social expectancies, negative personal and social expectancies, and expectancies regarding cognitive and motor capacities, respectively.
In contrast with these qualitative findings, however, the analysis of Peruvian students' scores on the items of the AEQ-A could not confirm the seven-component structure of the original instrument.
In accordance with these findings, a Peruvian version of the AEQ-A that measures these three components was developed.
The fact that it was not possible to reproduce the dimensions of the original AEQ-A may be due to various reasons.