Psychometric Properties of the Youth Sport Environment Questionnaire (YSEQ): Validity and Reliability Study

Öz

The purpose of this study was to adapt into Turkish and examine the psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Youth Sport Environment Questionnaire (YSEQ). The YSEQ is designed to assess youth athletes’ perceptions of team cohesion. A total of 250 youth athletes (X_age: 15.10±1.16) from a variety of team sports (football, basketball and volleyball), 70 female (X_age: 14.70±1.09) and 180 male (X_age: 15.41±1.15) participated in this study. The YSEQ consists of 18 items that are scored on 9-point Likert scale and two subscales (social cohesion and task cohesion). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Cronbach’s Alpha, Corrected item-total correlations, Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and Composite Reliability (CR) were used to test validity and reliability of the scale. Linguistic equivalence and readability of the YSEQ were examined. Results of the CFA provided support the hypothesized two-factor structure as in the original YSEQ (x²/sd=2.36, RMSEA=0.074, SRMR=0.06, NNFI=0.909, GFI=0.893, CFI=0.923). The YSEQ yielded high internal consistency (Cronbach's α > .87), adequate test results in convergent and discriminant validity, and achieved linguistic equivalence. In conclusion, the Turkish version of the YSEQ retains good and adequate psychometric properties of the original scale in assessing perceptions of team cohesion in youth sport. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• team cohesion,youth athletes

Genç Sporcu Takım Sargınlığı Ölçeği’nin (GSTSÖ) Psikometrik Özellikleri: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Genç Spor Çevre Envanteri (GSÇE)’nin (Youth Sport Environment Questionnaire) Türkçeye uyarlanması ve psikometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesidir. GSÇE, genç sporcuların takım sargınlığı algılarını değerlendirmek üzere geliştirilmiş bir ölçme aracıdır. Çalışmaya futbol, basketbol ve voleybol takım sporlarında mücadele eden 70 kadın (xYaş: 14.70±1.09) ve 180 erkek (xYaş: 15.41±1.15) olmak üzere 250 genç sporcu (xYaş: 15.10±1.16) katılmıştır. GSÇE, 9’lu likert tipinde değerlendirilen, 2 alt boyut (sosyal sargınlık, görev sargınlığı) ve 18 maddeden oluşmaktadır. Verilerin analizinde, doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA), Cronbach Alpha iç tutarlılık katsayısı, düzeltilmiş madde-toplam korelâsyonları, Ortalama Açıklanan Varyans (AVE) değeri ve Birleşik Güvenirlik (CR) katsayısı kullanılmıştır. Envanterin dilsel eşdeğerliği ve okunabilirlik düzeyi incelenmiştir. Envanterin yapı geçerliğine ilişkin bulgular, orijinal ölçekteki iki faktörlü yapıyı destekler niteliktedir (x²/sd=2.36, RMSEA=0.074, SRMR=0.06, NNFI=0.909, GFI=0.893, CFI=0.923). Envantere ilişkin iç tutarlık düzeyinin yüksek (Cronbach's α > .87), yakınsak ve ayrışım geçerliklerinin yeterli düzeyde olduğu ortaya çıkmış, dilsel eşdeğerliği sağladığı görülmüştür. Sonuç olarak, GSÇE’nin, genç sporcuların takım sargınlığı algılarını değerlendirmek üzere, orijinal ölçekteki gibi iyi ve yeterli düzeyde psikometrik özelliklere sahip olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• takım sargınlığı,genç sporcular

Kaynakça

1. Alpar R. (2010). Spor, Sağlık ve Eğitim Bilimlerinden Örneklerle Uygulamalı İstatistik ve Geçerlik- Güvenirlik, Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
2. Ateşman E. (1997). Türkçede okunabilirliğin ölçülmesi. Ankara Üniversitesi TÖMER Dil Dergisi, 58, 171-174.
3. Benson AJ, Šiška P, Eys M, Priklerová S, Slepička P. (2016). A prospective multilevel examination of the relationship between cohesion and team performance in elite youth sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 27, 39-46.
4. Bollen KA, Hoyle RH. (1990). Perceived cohesion: A conceptual and empirical examination. Social Forces, 479-504.
5. Bosselut G, McLaren CD, Eys MA, Heuzé JP. (2012). Reciprocity of the relationship between role ambiguity and group cohesion in youth interdependent sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13(3), 341-348.
6. Brislin RW. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. In: Lonner WJ & Berry JW. (Eds.), Field methods in educational research, (pp. 137–164). Newbury Park, CA, USA: Sage.
7. Bruner MW, Spink KS. (2007). The effects of team building on the adherence patterns of youth exercise participants. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 29, 149.
8. Büyüköztürk Ş. (2015). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum (Gözden geçirilmiş yirmi birinci baskı). Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.

9. Byrne BM. (2010). Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS, Basic Concepts, Applications and Programming. New York, Routledge Press, 53-95.
10. Fornell C, Larcker DF. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
11. Carless SA, De Paoloa C. (2000). The measurement of cohesion in work teams. Small Group Research, 31(1), 71-88.
12. Carron AV. (1982). Cohesiveness in sport groups: Interpretations and considerations. Journal of Sport Psychology, 4, 123-138.
13. Carron AV, Widmeyer WN, Brawley LR. (1985) The development of an instrument to assess cohesion in sport teams: The Group Environment Questionnaire. Journal of Sport Psychology, 7(3), 244-266.
14. Carron AV, Brawley LR, Widmeyer WN. (1998). The measurement of cohesiveness in sport groups. In: Duda JL. (Ed.), Advances in Sport and Exercise Psychology Measurement (pp. 213-226). Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.
15. Eshghi MA, Kordi R, Memari AH, Ghaziasgar A, Mansournia MA, Zamani Sani SH. (2015). Validity and reliability of Farsi version of Youth Sport Environment Questionnaire. Journal of Sports Medicine, 2015, 1-6.
16. Eys MA, Lougheed T, Bray SR, Carron AV. (2009). Development of a cohesion questionnaire for youth: The Youth Sport Environment Questionnaire, Kinesiology and Physical Education Faculty Publications, 31(3), 390-408.
17. Eys M, Ohlert J, Evans MB, Wolf SA, Martin LJ, Bussel MV, Steins C. (2015). Cohesion and performance for female and male sport teams, The Sport Psychologist, 29(2), 97-109.
18. Field A. (2009). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc, London, 627-685.
19. Gefen D, Straub D, Boudreau MC. (2000). Structural equation modeling and regression: guidelines for research practice. Communications of the association for information systems, 4(1), 1-78.
20. Gill DL. (2000). Psychological Dynamics of Sport and Exercise, Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL, 303-318.
21. Jenkins JM, Alderman BL. (2011). Influence of sport education on group cohesion in university physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 30, 214-230.
22. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.). Upper saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
23. Harrington D. (2008). Confirmatory Factor Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, 3-21.
24. Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen M. (2008). Structual equation modeling: Guidelines for determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6 (1), 53-60.
25. Loughead TM, Bloom GA, (2013). Team cohesion in sport: Critical overview and implications for team building, In: Potrac P, Gilbert W & Denison J (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Sports Coaching, (pp. 345-356). New York: Routledge.
26. Paradis KF, Loughead TM. (2012). Examining the mediating role of cohesion between athlete leadership and athlete satisfaction in youth sport. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 43(2), 117.
27. Pescosolido AT, Saavedra R. (2012). Cohesion and sports teams: A review. Small Group Research 43(6), 744–758
28. Rubin KH, Bukowski W, Parker J. (2006). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In: Eisenberg N. (Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: Social, Emotional, and Personality Development, (pp. 571–645). Wiley, New York.
29. Schutz RW, Eom HJ, Smoll FL, Smith RE. (1994). Examination of the factorial validity of the Group Environment Questionnaire. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 65(3), 226-236.
30. Senécal J, Loughead TM, Bloom GA. (2008). A season-long team-building intervention: Examining the effect of team goal setting on cohesion. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 30(2), 186–199.
31. Sümer N. (2000). Yapısal Eşitlik Modelleri, Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3 (6), 49-74.
32. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics, Pearson Education Inc, Boston, 676-780.
33. Wood NJ. (2008). The Social Influences of Coaches And Teammates in Youth Soccer: Is It Possible to Have Friendly Competition?, Doktora Tezi, Temple University, Kinesiology Institution, Philadelphia.