Reliability and Validity of ÇAĞIN Hand and Foot Reaction Tests Protocol

Year 2024, , 59 - 74, 06.03.2024

Musab Çağın , Sezen Çimen Polat , Özlem Orhan , Ebru Çetin , Mekki Abdioğlu , İmdat Yarım , Halil İbrahim Cicioğlu

https://doi.org/10.30786/jef.1386526

Cited By: 1

Abstract

The present study aims to test the reliability and validity of ÇAĞIN Hand and Foot Reaction Tests. A total of 120 athletes, 60 under the age of 18 and 60 over the age of 18 who were actively playing soccer, participated in the study. ÇAĞIN Hand and Foot Reaction Tests were applied to the athletes participating in the study 3 times with 2-week intervals using FitLight Trainer and BlazePod devices. In order to determine the validity of the data obtained from the athletes by applying ÇAĞIN Hand and Foot Reaction Tests, two measurements made with the FitLight Trainer device at different times were compared, and in order to determine the reliability, measurements made with the FitLight Trainer and BlazePod device on different days were compared and analyzed. Paired Simple T-Test in SPSS 26.0 package program was applied to determine both validity and reliability. According to the findings obtained, the validity and reliability correlation coefficients of all 6 tests in the ÇAĞIN Hand and Foot Reaction Tests were found to be r>0.70 (p<0.05). In the light of these findings, it was determined that the validity and reliability of ÇAĞIN Hand and Foot Reaction Tests were very high (r= 0.70-0.90).

Keywords

ÇAĞIN, reaction test, reliability, validity, football

References

• Blanpied, P., & Oksendahl, H. (2006). Reaction times and electromechanical delay in reactions of increasing and decreasing force. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 103(3), 743-754.
• Chiu, C. N., Chen, C. Y., & Muggleton, N. G. (2017). Sport, time pressure, and cognitive performance. Progress in Brain Research, 234, 85-99.
• de-Oliveira, L. A., Matos, M. V., Fernandes, I. G., Nascimento, D. A., & da Silva-Grigoletto, M. E. (2021). Test-retest reliability of a visual-cognitive technology (BlazePod™) to measure response time. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine, 20(1), 179.
• Elsworthy, N., Callaghan, D. E., Scanlan, A. T., Kertesz, A. H., Kean, C. O., Dascombe, B. J., & Guy, J. H. (2021). Validity and Reliability of Using Load-Velocity Relationship Profiles to Establish Back Squat 1 m· s‐1 Load. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 35(2), 340-346.
• Günay, M., Tamer, K., & Cicioğlu, H.İ. (2013). Spor Fizyolojisi ve Performans Ölçümü. Gazi Kitapevi, Ankara.
• Jukic, I., García-Ramos, A., Malecek, J., Omcirk, D., & Tufano, J. J. (2022). Validity of load–velocity relationship to predict 1 repetition maximum during deadlifts performed with and without lifting straps: the accuracy of six prediction models. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 36(4), 902-910.
• Klotz, J. M., Johnson, M. D., Wu, S. W., Isaacs, K. M., & Gilbert, D. L. (2012). Relationship between reaction time variability and motor skill development in ADHD. Child Neuropsychology, 18(6), 576-585.
• Magill, R., & Anderson, D. I. (2010). Motor learning and control. McGraw-Hill Publishing, New York.
• Mercer, V. S., Hankins, C. C., Spinks, A. J., & Tedder, D. D. (2009). Reliability and validity of a clinical test of reaction time in older adults. Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy, 32(3), 103-110.
• Noorani, I., & Carpenter, R. H. S. (2016). The LATER model of reaction time and decision. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 64, 229-251.
• Prelević, M., Dopsaj, M., & Stančin, S. (2023). Timing in Lower Limb Complex Movement Tests for DanceSport Athletes: Relation between FitLight Trainer and IMU Measurements. Sensors, 23(3), 1456.
• Reigal, R. E., Barrero, S., Martín, I., Morales-Sánchez, V., Juárez-Ruiz de Mier, R., & Hernández-Mendo, A. (2019). Relationships between reaction time, selective attention, physical activity, and physical fitness in children. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2278.
• Schmidt, P. A., & Dark, V. J. (1999). Flanker recall and the flanker validity effect may reflect different attentional processes. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 424-437.