The ability to make creative decisions is crucial in sports games (1), as well as in other fields such as music, art, and science (2–4). In football, quick decision-making and creativity are particularly important due to the dynamic nature of the sport, where 22 players consistently interact. The creativity allows players to deal more effectively with unique situations while making it hard for opposition to predict what they will do next (1). Creativity is defined as the player's ability to generate various solutions that are not only original but also appropriate and useful (4, 5). From a tactical standpoint, creativity involves generating diverse solutions to problems in specific situations, characterized by their surprise and rarity (6). Therefore, creativity is associated with a player's ability to make decisions in a specific context, making opponents less likely to anticipate their moves (7).

In the meantime, creativity has not been well utilized as an evaluation factor when assessing the performance of players (teams) in football. Creativity is generally deemed to intangible quality, which is impossible to be assessed through statistics (8). While the conventional concept of creativity is appropriate for explaining works of art, such as paintings, sculptures, poems, and songs, it falls short when applied to improvisational performing arts like jazz, freestyle rap, and dance, where creativity is influenced by time constraints. Although the concept of improvisation, which includes both creativity and spontaneity (9), has been introduced, the sports context remains distinct from the arts.

The concept of “creactability” a construct that integrates creativity, quickness, and adaptability has been proposed as a more comprehensive framework for evaluating football performance than traditional measures of creativity. Athletes must be creative, spontaneous, and competitive within the formal constraints of the game, and “creactability” reflects these demands more effectively than isolated cognitive or physical indicators.

“creactability” comprises three core sub-factors quickness, creativity, and adaptability. It is further influenced by behavioral and psychological attributes such as analytical skills, positivity, composure, fundamental skills, and immersion. These factors collectively enhance a player's ability to respond effectively to rapidly changing play conditions an essential competency in modern football. In particular, quickness and adaptability facilitate rapid transitions between offensive and defensive roles, split-second decision-making, and flexible reactions to opponents' movements (10).

In traditional assessments, creativity in team sports has largely relied on subjective expert evaluations (6), while performance has often been measured using objective technical and physical indicators, such as number of shots, pass success rate, and ball possession (11–13), or total distance covered, maximum velocity, and high-intensity running (HIR) frequency (14–16). While these indicators remain valuable, advancements in training and conditioning have narrowed physical and technical differences between teams. As a result, breaking through defensive structures now increasingly requires unpredictable, intelligent play commonly referred to as spatial intelligence or creativity (8). Therefore, the need for more nuanced and multidimensional assessment tools like the “creactability” scale has become more pressing for talent identification and player development.

However, unlikely technical and physical indicators, using creativity as a measurement variable posed challenges due to difficulties in quantification, lack of uniform definition, etc (17). Few researchers have explored the perceptual and cognitive processes that underlie creative behavior in these performance contexts (7). For instance, eye movement recording was used to assess the visual search behaviors of skilled football players making decisions (18, 19), and verbal reports were employed to measure how players translate information from the visual system into appropriate creative cognitive processes and behaviors (20, 21).

In previous research, various perspectives on creativity in football have been explored. Lee, Kang & Kim (22) introduced the novel concept of “creactability” in sports using a grounded theory research method, where researchers develop a comprehensive theory based on the processes, behaviors, and interactions perceived by numerous research participants (23). Lee et al. (22) conducted qualitative analysis with Delphi survey techniques to establish a new model for creativity, followed by a quantitative analysis to examine hypotheses. They proposed that assessing creativity in football cannot be solely based on a specific indicator and introduced the novel concept of “creactability”. “Creactability” comprises three sub-factors (quickness, creativity, adaptability), and various factors (analytical skills, positivity, composure, basic skills, immersion) may positively or negatively influence “creactability”. The research model is depicted in Figure 1.

To assess the model's reliability, Lee et al. (22) employed various methods, including Cronbach's coefficient and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). However, there were limitations in generalizing the findings, and the methods for evaluating “creactability” have not been fully validated. An alternative approach could be the Rasch model, capable of converting data measured on a Likert scale into logit scores. The difficulty level is calculated using statistical methods, providing an objective and logical weight calculation instead of relying on subjective judgments. The Rasch model allows not only suitability analysis of the questions but also of dimensionality and the number of response categories, enabling a meaningful analysis beyond the scope of CFA. Previous research in physical education and sport psychology has demonstrated the utility of the Rasch model for instrument validation, particularly when assessing constructs that involve subjective judgment and multidimensional behaviors (24).

This study aimed to establish construct-related validity evidence for the “creactability” scale (22) in football by applying the Rasch model. Specific objectives included: (1) assessing whether each scale measures a unidimensional construct, (2) investigating Differential Item Functioning (DIF) based on team groups (i.e., the rankings of higher and lower teams), (3) ensuring a wide range of “creactability” item difficulty and personal ability (respondents “creactability” levels) for assessing changes, and 4) exploring differences in “creactability” across subscales (7-point scale).

This study used the Rasch model to investigate the construct-related validity evidence of the “creactability” scale for athletes. The “creactability” in the field of sports must include elements of competition and victory in matches (9, 22). Therefore, it can be argued that the creativity within “creactability” is more suitably interpreted in a sports context rather than an artistic one. This study further examined the validity of the “creactability” scale developed by Lee et al. (22) using the advanced Rasch model.

After applying the Rasch rating model, the unidimensionality of all 9 items of the “creactability” scale was confirmed. Surprisingly, the DIF analysis revealed no biased items for specific groups within team groups (i.e., the rankings of higher and lower teams). This result could provide scientific evidence regarding the fair and accurate measurement of the conceptual construct of “creactability” in individual football players. All 9 items on the “creactability” scale were presented with a moderate level of difficulty. The person separation index (PSI) criterion value for the “creactability” scale of football players is 4 within a range of 1–7. Therefore, it indicates that the developed 9 items were effective in measuring the attributes of the 241 respondents using a 7-point scale category.

When applying the Likert scale, it is commonly known to use 5 or 7-point scales, and it has been reported that the reliability of the test does not increase further and shows a plateau when applying Likert scales larger than 7-point, thus it's not advisable to use scales larger than 7-point (45). Based on this, the process of developing scales based on classical test theory (CTT) can negatively affect the discriminative power and reliability of the scale due to the subjective determination of response categories by researchers (25). Consequently, many studies are applying a more specific and empirical validity verification method using item response theory (IRT), which takes into account discriminability and difficulty (25, 46, 47).

In IRT using the Rasch model, the determination of response categories is made using logit values between a person's attribute scores and item difficulty, and the probability curves of the likelihood of choosing a specific response category (48). Accordingly, this study utilized the Rasch model to analyze the appropriateness of response categories, and the results indicated that a 7-point category is suitable. The step calibration, which is the numerical value of the 6 points where the category probability curves of the 7-point scale intersect, showed a progressively increasing trend, confirming the appropriateness of the applied 7-point scale. However, as observed in Table 4 and Figure 3, the potential for categorization between 2 and 3 and 5–6 points can be identified. While new “creactability” measurement scales were developed, “optimal categorization” could also be adopted. This has been successfully applied in other studies utilizing the Rasch rating model (49–53). In the future, the function of categories (e.g., not at all, not usually, normal, usually, and very) should be investigated based on the Rasch model.

Previous studies have indicated that the creativity and adaptability of athletes positively impact their athletic performance (18, 54–56). Therefore, utilizing the “creactability” scale, which has been validated for football players, and coaches can provide an environment conducive to the development of players' decision-making ability. Coaches can lead more representative football-specific decision-making activities during training sessions (57). Also, it could serve as a crucial factor in assessing a player's football intelligence, which could be meaningfully utilized in scouting to recruit players. Even though the Rasch model has provided construct-related validity evidence for the “creactability” scale, more research using this developed scale is essential to explore its explanatory and predictive power among athletes from various sports. This necessity arises because the establishment of construct validity is an ongoing process (58).

This study examined the construct-related validity of the “creactability” scale for football players using the Rasch model. All items demonstrated unidimensionality, no DIF across team groups, and appropriate item difficulty and person separation. The 7-point response format was also validated. These results support the scale's validity for assessing creative and adaptive performance in football. Further validation and item refinement are recommended to broaden its applicability.