Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Antrenör Kaynaklı Destekleyici ve Kısıtlayıcı Güdüsel İklim Ölçeği’nin Bireysel Sporlarda Psikometrik Özelliklerinin Sınanması

Year 2020, Volume: 25 Issue: 4, 421 - 440, 02.10.2020

Duygu Karadağ , Hülya Aşçı

Abstract

Bu çalışmada antrenör tarafından yaratılan güdüsel iklimi çok boyutlu ve hiyerarşik bir modele dayanarak ölçen “Antrenör Kaynaklı Destekleyici ve Kısıtlayıcı Güdüsel İklim Ölçeği” nin bireysel sporlarda geçerlik ve güvenirliğinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırma iki çalışmadan oluşmaktadır. Birinci çalışmada ölçeğin yapı geçerliği Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) ve yakınsak geçerlik ile incelenmiş; güvenirliliği ise Cronbach Alfa iç tutarlık katsayısı ile hesaplanmıştır. İkinci çalışmada ölçeğin beş faktörlü ve iki faktörlü yapısı birinci düzey; beş alt faktörlü ve iki üst faktörlü yapısı ise ikinci düzey Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) ile incelenmiştir. Ölçeğin yakınsak ve ıraksak geçerliliği ile bileşik güvenirliği için Ortalama Açıklanan Varyans (AVE), Maksimum Paylaşılan Varyansın Karesi (MSV), Paylaşılan Varyansın Karesinin Ortalaması (ASV) ile Bileşik Güvenilirlik (CR) değerleri hesaplanmıştır. Birinci çalışmaya 180 kız (X̄yaş=14.97; Ss=1.75), 180 erkek (X̄yaş=15.02; Ss=1.85) toplam 360 (X̄yaş=15.00; Ss=1.80); ikinci çalışmaya ise 113 kız (X̄yaş=15.32; Ss=1.46), 183 erkek (X̄yaş=15.67; Ss=1.59) toplam 296 (X̄yaş=15.54; Ss=1.55) adolesan sporcu katılmıştır. Birinci çalışma kapsamında yapılan Temel Bileşenler Faktör Analizi Varimaks Dönüştürme sonuçları ölçeğin beş faktörlü yapısını desteklemekte ve maddeler toplam varyansın %68.70'ini açıklarken; ikinci çalışma kapsamında yapılan DFA ile kabul edilebilir uyum değerlerine ulaşılmıştır. Birinci çalışma kapsamında yapılan Antrenör Kaynaklı Destekleyici ve Kısıtlayıcı Güdüsel İklim Ölçeği’nin, Antrenör kaynaklı özerklik desteği ile arasındaki korelasyon, ölçeğin yakınsak geçerliğini desteklerken; ikinci çalışma kapsamında hesaplanan AVE, MSV, ASV ve CR değerleri de yakınsak ve ıraksak geçerliği destekler niteliktedir. Ölçeğin güvenirliğine ilişkin birinci çalışma kapsamında hesaplanan iç tutarlık katsayıları .76 ve .94 arasında değişirken; ikinci çalışma kapsamında hesaplanan iç tutarlık katsayıları ölçeğin beş faktörlü yapısı için .73 ve .87 arasında, iki faktörlü yapısını oluşturan her iki alt boyut içinde .92 değerini almıştır. Ölçeğin güvenilirliğini belirlemek amacıyla ikinci çalışma kapsamında ayrıca Bileşik Güvenirlik katsayıları hesaplanmış; ölçeğin beş faktörlü yapısı için hesaplanan CR katsayılarının .79 ile .87 arasında olduğu; iki faktörlü yapısı için ise .93 ve .92 değerlerini aldığı görülmektedir. Sonuçlar, “Antrenör Kaynaklı Destekleyici ve Kısıtlayıcı Güdüsel İklim Ölçeği’’nin bireysel sporlar ile uğraşan adolesanlarda antrenör kaynaklı güdüsel iklimin değerlendirilmesi için geçerli ve güvenilir bir araç olduğunu göstermektedir.

Keywords

Güdüsel iklim Başarı hedefi kuramı Hür irade kuramı Antrenör Bireysel sporlar Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik

References

  • 1. Aksu, G., Eser, M. T. ve Güzeller, C. O. (2017). Açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ile yapısal eşitlik modeli uygulamaları. İstanbul: Detay Yayıncılık.
  • 2. Alpar, R. (2006). Spor bilimlerinde uygulamalı istatistik. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • 3. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261.
  • 4. Amorose, A. J., Horn, T. S. (2001). Pre-to post-season changes in the intrinsic motivation of first year college athletes: Relationships with coaching behavior and scholarship status. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13, 355-373.
  • 5. Appleton, P. R., Ntoumanis, N., Quested, E., Viladrich, C. and Duda, J. L. (2016). Initial Validation of the Coach-Created Empowering and Disempowering Motivational Climate Questionnaire (EDMCQ-C). Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 22, 53-65
  • 6. Banack, H. R., Sabiston, C. M. and Bloom G. A. (2011). Coach autonomy support, basic need satisfaction and intrinsic motivation of paralympic athletes. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82(4), 722-730.
  • 7. Baric, R., Bucik, V. (2009). Motivational differences in athletes trained by coaches of different motivational and leadership profiles. Kinesiology, 41(2), 181-194.
  • 8. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238.
  • 9. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2018). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Atıf İndeksi.
  • 10. Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M. (1985). Self-determination and intrinsic motivation in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
  • 11. Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "What" and "Why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
  • 12. Duda, J. L. (2001). Achievement goal research in sport: Pushing the boundaries and clarifying some misunderstandings. Roberts, G.C (Ed.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 129-182). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
  • 13. Duda, J. L. (2013). The Conceptual and empirical foundations of empowering coaching: Setting the stage for the PAPA Project. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11, 311- 318.
  • 14. Duda, J. L., Quested, E., Haug, E., Samdal, O., Wold, B., Balaguer, I., Castillo, I., Sarrazin, P., Papaioannou, A., Ronglan, L. T., Hall, H. and Cruz, J. (2013). Promoting adolescent health through an intervention aimed at improving the quality of their participation in physical activity (PAPA): Background to the project and main trial protocol. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11(4), 319-327.
  • 15. Duda, J. L., Appleton, P. R. (2016). Empowering and disempowering coaching climates: Conceptualization, measurement considerations and intervention implications. In Sport and Exercise Psychology Research (pp. 373-388). London: Elsevier.
  • 16. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
  • 17. Gillet, N., Vallerand, R. J., Amoura, S. and Baldes, B. (2010). Influence of coaches' autonomy support on athletes' motivation and sport performance: a test of the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11(2), 155-161.
  • 18. Gözmen Elmas, A., Akın, N. K. ve Aşçı, F. H. (2018). Antrenör Kaynaklı Destekleyici ve Kısıtlayıcı Güdüsel İklim Ölçeği’nin türk adolesan sporcuları için geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Spormetre Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 16(3), 61-80.
  • 19. Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., Hein, V., Pihu, M., Soos, I., ve Karsai, I. (2007). The perceived autonomy aupport scale for exercise settings (PASSES): Development, validity and cross cultural invariance in young people. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8, 632-653.
  • 20. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th edition). Prentice Hall.
  • 21. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M. (2017). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA, USA
  • 22. Hu, L. T. and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit ındexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
  • 23. Jowett, S., Ntoumanis, N. (2004). The Coach–Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART‐Q): Development and initial validation. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 14(4), 245-257.
  • 24. Karadağ, D., Gözmen, A, Keskin, N., Aşçı, F. H. (2016, Kasım). The reliability and validity of the perceived autonomy support scale (coaches form) for adolescent athletes. 14. Uluslararası Spor Bilimleri Kongresine sunulan bildiri, Antalya.
  • 25. Mageau, G. A., Vallerand, R. J. (2003). The coach–athlete relationship: a motivational model. Journal of Sports Science, 21(11), 883-904.
  • 26. Milton, D., Appleton, P. R., Duda J. L., Bryant, A. (2018). Initial validation of the teacher-created empowering and disempowering motivational climate questionnaire in physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 37(4), 340-351.
  • 27. Müftüler, M. (2016). Egzersizde algılanan özerklik desteği ölçeği: Türkçe geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. International Journal of Human Sciences, 13(1), 2158-2169.
  • 28. Moreno, M. J. A., San Roman, M. L., Galindo, C. M, Alonso, N., Gonzalez-Cutre, D. (2008). Peers’ influence on exercise enjoyment: a self-determination theory approach. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 7, 23-31.
  • 29. Myers, N. D., Vargas-Tonsing, T. M., Feltz, D. L. (2005). Coaching efficacy in intercollegiate coaches: Sources, coaching behavior and team variables. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 6(1), 129-143.
  • 30. Newton, M., Duda, J. L., Yin, Z. (2000). Examination of the psychometric properties of the perceived motivational climate in sport questionnaire-2 in a sample of female athletes. Journal of Sports Sciences, 18(4), 275-290.
  • 31. Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • 32. Papaioannou, A., Marsh, H. W., and Theodorakis, Y. (2004). A multilevel approach to motivational climate in physical education and sport settings: An individual or a group level construct? Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 26(1), 90-118.
  • 33. Riemer, H. A. (2007). Multidimensional model of coach leadership. Jowett, S. and Lavallee (Ed.), Social psychology in sport (pp. 53-57). Champaign IL: Human Kinetics.
  • 34. Roberts, G. C. ve Ommundsen, Y. (1996). Effect of goal orientation on achievement beliefs, cognition and strategies in team sport. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 6(1), 46-56.
  • 35. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
  • 36. Schumacker, R. E., Lomax, R. G. (2015). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • 37. Shaw, D., Gorely, T., Corban, R. (2005). Sport and exercise psychology. NY: Taylor and Francis.
  • 38. Smith, S. L., Fry, M. D., Ethington, C. A., Li, Y. (2005). The effect of female athletes’ perceptions of their coaches’ behaviors on their perceptions of the motivational climate. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 17, 170-177.
  • 39. Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L. (2007). Social-cognitive approach to coaching behaviors. Jowett, S. and Lavallee (Ed.), Social psychology in sport (pp. 75-90). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
  • 40. Smith, N., Tessier, D., Tzioumakis., Y., Quested, E., Appleton, P., Sarrazin, P., Papaioannou, A., and Duda, J. L. (2015). Development and validation of the multidimensional motivational climate observation system. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 37(1), 4-22.
  • 41. Souza, A. C. D., Alexandre, N. M. C., Guirardello, E. D. B. (2017). Psychometric properties in ınstruments evaluation of reliability and validity. Epidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde, 26, 649-659.
  • 42. Yang, Y., Green, S. B. (2011). Coefficient alpha: a reliability coefficient for the 21st century. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(4), 377-392.

Year 2020, Volume: 25 Issue: 4, 421 - 440, 02.10.2020

Duygu Karadağ , Hülya Aşçı

Abstract

In this study, the validity and reliability of Empowering and Disempowering Motivational Climate Questionnaire (EDMCQ-C) which measures the motivational climate created by the coach based on a multi-dimensional and hierarchical model were tested. The research consists of two separate studies. In the first study, the construct validity of the scale was examined by Exploratory Factor Analysis and convergent validty. Cronbach’s Alpha internal consistency coefficient was calculated to test reliability. In the second study, the five-factor and two-factor structure of the scale were examined at the first order confirmatory factor analysis; while the five-sub factors with two-upper factor structure were examined at the second order confirmatory factor analysis. Average Variance Extracted (AVE), Maximum Shared Variance (MSV), Average Shared Variance (ASV) and Composite Reliability (CR) values were calculated for the scale's convergent-divergent validity and reliability. One hundred eighty girls (Mage=14.97; Sd=1.75), 180 boys (Mage=15.02; Sd=1.85), 360 adolescent (Mage=15.00; Sd=1.80) athletes voluntarily participated in the first study and 113 girls (Mage=15.32; Sd=1.46) and 183 boys (Mage=15.67; Sd=1.59), totally 296 adolescent (Mage=15.54; Sd=1.55) athletes participated in the second study. The results of Principle Components Factor Analysis with Varimax Rotation supported the five-factor structure of the scale and the items explained 68.70% of the total variance; with the DFA performed within the scope of the second study, acceptable compliance values were achieved. The correlation between the Empowering and Disempowering Motivational Climate Questionnaire and Perceived Autonomy Support Scale supports the convergent validity of the inventory; AVE, MSV, ASV and CR values calculated within the scope of the second study also support convergent and divergent validity. While the internal consistency coefficients calculated within the scope of the first study regarding the reliability of the scale varied between .76 and .94; the internal consistency coefficients calculated within the scope of the second study took the value between .73 and .87 for the five-factor structure of the scale and .92 in both sub-dimensions the two-factor structure. CR coefficients were also calculated within the scope of the second study to determine the reliability of the scale; the CR coefficients calculated for the five-factor structure of the scale are between .79 and .87, for its two-factor structure, it is seen that it takes .93 and .92 values. The results of the study suggest that the Empowering and Disempowering Motivational Climate Questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool for the evaluation of the coach creadted motivational climate in adolescents interested in individual sports.

Keywords

Motivational climate Self determination theory Achievement goal theory Coach Indivudual sports Validity and reliability

References

  • 1. Aksu, G., Eser, M. T. ve Güzeller, C. O. (2017). Açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ile yapısal eşitlik modeli uygulamaları. İstanbul: Detay Yayıncılık.
  • 2. Alpar, R. (2006). Spor bilimlerinde uygulamalı istatistik. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • 3. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261.
  • 4. Amorose, A. J., Horn, T. S. (2001). Pre-to post-season changes in the intrinsic motivation of first year college athletes: Relationships with coaching behavior and scholarship status. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13, 355-373.
  • 5. Appleton, P. R., Ntoumanis, N., Quested, E., Viladrich, C. and Duda, J. L. (2016). Initial Validation of the Coach-Created Empowering and Disempowering Motivational Climate Questionnaire (EDMCQ-C). Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 22, 53-65
  • 6. Banack, H. R., Sabiston, C. M. and Bloom G. A. (2011). Coach autonomy support, basic need satisfaction and intrinsic motivation of paralympic athletes. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82(4), 722-730.
  • 7. Baric, R., Bucik, V. (2009). Motivational differences in athletes trained by coaches of different motivational and leadership profiles. Kinesiology, 41(2), 181-194.
  • 8. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238.
  • 9. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2018). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Atıf İndeksi.
  • 10. Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M. (1985). Self-determination and intrinsic motivation in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
  • 11. Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "What" and "Why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
  • 12. Duda, J. L. (2001). Achievement goal research in sport: Pushing the boundaries and clarifying some misunderstandings. Roberts, G.C (Ed.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 129-182). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
  • 13. Duda, J. L. (2013). The Conceptual and empirical foundations of empowering coaching: Setting the stage for the PAPA Project. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11, 311- 318.
  • 14. Duda, J. L., Quested, E., Haug, E., Samdal, O., Wold, B., Balaguer, I., Castillo, I., Sarrazin, P., Papaioannou, A., Ronglan, L. T., Hall, H. and Cruz, J. (2013). Promoting adolescent health through an intervention aimed at improving the quality of their participation in physical activity (PAPA): Background to the project and main trial protocol. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11(4), 319-327.
  • 15. Duda, J. L., Appleton, P. R. (2016). Empowering and disempowering coaching climates: Conceptualization, measurement considerations and intervention implications. In Sport and Exercise Psychology Research (pp. 373-388). London: Elsevier.
  • 16. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
  • 17. Gillet, N., Vallerand, R. J., Amoura, S. and Baldes, B. (2010). Influence of coaches' autonomy support on athletes' motivation and sport performance: a test of the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11(2), 155-161.
  • 18. Gözmen Elmas, A., Akın, N. K. ve Aşçı, F. H. (2018). Antrenör Kaynaklı Destekleyici ve Kısıtlayıcı Güdüsel İklim Ölçeği’nin türk adolesan sporcuları için geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Spormetre Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 16(3), 61-80.
  • 19. Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., Hein, V., Pihu, M., Soos, I., ve Karsai, I. (2007). The perceived autonomy aupport scale for exercise settings (PASSES): Development, validity and cross cultural invariance in young people. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8, 632-653.
  • 20. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th edition). Prentice Hall.
  • 21. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M. (2017). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA, USA
  • 22. Hu, L. T. and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit ındexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
  • 23. Jowett, S., Ntoumanis, N. (2004). The Coach–Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART‐Q): Development and initial validation. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 14(4), 245-257.
  • 24. Karadağ, D., Gözmen, A, Keskin, N., Aşçı, F. H. (2016, Kasım). The reliability and validity of the perceived autonomy support scale (coaches form) for adolescent athletes. 14. Uluslararası Spor Bilimleri Kongresine sunulan bildiri, Antalya.
  • 25. Mageau, G. A., Vallerand, R. J. (2003). The coach–athlete relationship: a motivational model. Journal of Sports Science, 21(11), 883-904.
  • 26. Milton, D., Appleton, P. R., Duda J. L., Bryant, A. (2018). Initial validation of the teacher-created empowering and disempowering motivational climate questionnaire in physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 37(4), 340-351.
  • 27. Müftüler, M. (2016). Egzersizde algılanan özerklik desteği ölçeği: Türkçe geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. International Journal of Human Sciences, 13(1), 2158-2169.
  • 28. Moreno, M. J. A., San Roman, M. L., Galindo, C. M, Alonso, N., Gonzalez-Cutre, D. (2008). Peers’ influence on exercise enjoyment: a self-determination theory approach. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 7, 23-31.
  • 29. Myers, N. D., Vargas-Tonsing, T. M., Feltz, D. L. (2005). Coaching efficacy in intercollegiate coaches: Sources, coaching behavior and team variables. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 6(1), 129-143.
  • 30. Newton, M., Duda, J. L., Yin, Z. (2000). Examination of the psychometric properties of the perceived motivational climate in sport questionnaire-2 in a sample of female athletes. Journal of Sports Sciences, 18(4), 275-290.
  • 31. Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • 32. Papaioannou, A., Marsh, H. W., and Theodorakis, Y. (2004). A multilevel approach to motivational climate in physical education and sport settings: An individual or a group level construct? Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 26(1), 90-118.
  • 33. Riemer, H. A. (2007). Multidimensional model of coach leadership. Jowett, S. and Lavallee (Ed.), Social psychology in sport (pp. 53-57). Champaign IL: Human Kinetics.
  • 34. Roberts, G. C. ve Ommundsen, Y. (1996). Effect of goal orientation on achievement beliefs, cognition and strategies in team sport. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 6(1), 46-56.
  • 35. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
  • 36. Schumacker, R. E., Lomax, R. G. (2015). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • 37. Shaw, D., Gorely, T., Corban, R. (2005). Sport and exercise psychology. NY: Taylor and Francis.
  • 38. Smith, S. L., Fry, M. D., Ethington, C. A., Li, Y. (2005). The effect of female athletes’ perceptions of their coaches’ behaviors on their perceptions of the motivational climate. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 17, 170-177.
  • 39. Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L. (2007). Social-cognitive approach to coaching behaviors. Jowett, S. and Lavallee (Ed.), Social psychology in sport (pp. 75-90). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
  • 40. Smith, N., Tessier, D., Tzioumakis., Y., Quested, E., Appleton, P., Sarrazin, P., Papaioannou, A., and Duda, J. L. (2015). Development and validation of the multidimensional motivational climate observation system. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 37(1), 4-22.
  • 41. Souza, A. C. D., Alexandre, N. M. C., Guirardello, E. D. B. (2017). Psychometric properties in ınstruments evaluation of reliability and validity. Epidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde, 26, 649-659.
  • 42. Yang, Y., Green, S. B. (2011). Coefficient alpha: a reliability coefficient for the 21st century. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(4), 377-392.
There are 42 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Sports Medicine
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Duygu Karadağ 0000-0002-6896-9307

Hülya Aşçı 0000-0002-6650-6931

Publication Date October 2, 2020
Submission Date June 8, 2020
Acceptance Date September 17, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2020 Volume: 25 Issue: 4

Cite

APA Karadağ, D., & Aşçı, H. (2020). Antrenör Kaynaklı Destekleyici ve Kısıtlayıcı Güdüsel İklim Ölçeği’nin Bireysel Sporlarda Psikometrik Özelliklerinin Sınanması. Gazi Journal of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, 25(4), 421-440.
 Download Cover Image

Gazi Journal of Physical Education and Sports Sciences is a scientific and peer-reviewed journal published quarterly.