本研究以自我知覺概念爲基礎探討個體的運動參與行爲。Brewer et al. (1993) and Anderson et al. (1994) 各自提出運動認定的概念來探討個體的運動參與行爲，但綜觀過去的研究，在運動認定方面並未有完善的概念與建構，探討運動的認定程度與運動行爲之間的關係，也未能有有效的測量工具。因此，本研究欲探討運動認定的概念與測量工具之建構，期望對運動認定建立更明確的概念，並以現有測量工具爲基礎發展更符合運動認定概念的量表。研究參與者採分層隨機抽樣18至60歲之一般民眾共178位。「運動認定量表中文版」經由項目分與因素分析刪除不適合題項後，抽取到四個因素，並將四個因素依其題項之屬性與意義，各命名爲「正面情緒」（10題）、「排他性／負面情緒」（10題）、「運動員認定」（4題）與「重要性」（3題）。四個分量表的Cronbach's α係數介於.81至.94之間；總量表的Cronbach's α係數爲.96，總解釋變異量爲68.21%。研究顯示有良好的效度與信度，未來可作爲運動認定相關研究的測量工具。

The purpose of this study was to investigate the concept of exercise identity and structure of measurement, and based on existing measurement tool to develop a better scale. Two identity-related concepts, namely athletic identity and exercise identity, have been associated with behaviors in physical activity domain by researchers. B. Brewer and colleagues (1993) argued that a strong athletic identity may influence individual adaptive behaviors in sport in both positive and negative ways. D. Anderson's research (1994; 1995; 1998; 2001) showed that exercise identity may have predictive value of exercise behavior It has been suggested in the literature, however a further examination backgrounds is needed. In addition, in a culture in which the concepts of athletic (sport) and exercise are ambiguous and difficult to be divided (e.g., Taiwanese/Chinese), athletic and exercise identities may be of the same concept. This study examined the structure of athletic and exercise identities with a sample form a Taiwanese/Chinese cultural background. Chinese versions of both Athletic Identity Measurement Scale and Exercise Identity Scale were administered to 178 adults. In the first stage of data analysis, factor analyses revealed that both athletic and exercise identities are one-dimensional in structure and these two concepts are strongly associated (r=92. p<.001). In the second stage of analysis, items from the two scales were combined and new items were added for α more comprehensive analysis. Factor analysis showed α 4-factor solution, including positive affect (10 items), exclusivity/negative affect (10 items), athlete identity (4 items), and importance (3 items). The Cronbach's α of four subscales were ranged .81 from .94. This study suggested further research should confirm the structure of Chinese version scale and examine the relationship between exercise behavior and exercise identity.