Revize Edilmiş Yarışma Durumluk Kaygı Envanterinin Kendine Güven Alt Ölçeğinin Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Year 2017, Volume: 15 Issue: 4, 135 - 142, 01.08.2017

Koray Kılıç Mustafa Levent İnce

https://doi.org/10.1501/Sporm_0000000328

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı “Revize Edilmiş Yarışma Durumluk Kaygı Envanteri’nin Kendine Güven Alt Ölçeği”nin (YDKE-2R’nin Kendine Güven Alt Ölçeği; Cox, Martens, ve Russel, 2003) “sürekli kendine güven”i ölçen formunun (Vierimaa, Erickson, Côté ve Gilbert, 2012) Türkçe halini geçerlik ve güvenirlik açısından sınamaktır. Ölçek bir alt boyut ve beş maddeden oluşmaktadır ve 4’lü Likert ölçeği ile derecelendirilmektedir. Ölçeğin anlaşılırlık ve içerik açısından uygunluğu daha önce 8 – 14 yaş arasında 12 yarışmacı sporcu ile “bilişsel görüşme” yöntemi kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir (Kılıç ve İnce, 2016). Daha sonra ölçek, 12 – 18 yaş aralığında bulunan ve birçok spor dalından ve ortamından 182 kadın (%47.6) ve 200 erkek (%52.4) toplam 382 sporcuya (ܺതyaş = 13.90; SS = 1.66) uygulanmıştır. Katılımcılar artistik cimnastik, atletizm, basketbol, boks, futbol, güreş, ritmik cimnastik, tenis, voleybol ve yüzme spor dalındandırlar. Ölçeğin yapı geçerliğini değerlendirmek amacıyla veri seti Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) ile incelenmiştir. Ölçeğin güvenirliğini sınamak amacıyla veri setinin Cronbach Alfa değeri hesaplanmıştır. DFA bulguları (GFI = 0.99; CFI = 0.98; TLI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.07) ölçeğin maddeleri ile gözlemlenen veri arasında kabul edilebilir derecede uygunluk olduğunu göstermektedir. Cronbach Alfa değeri (α = 0.76), ölçeğin iç tutarlılığının kabul edilebilir bir seviyede olduğunu göstermektedir. Sonuç olarak, “YDKE-2R’nin Kendine Güven Alt Ölçeği”nin “sürekli kendine güven”i ölçen formunun Türkçe halinin, gençlerin sporda kendine güven algılarını ölçmede geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçüm aracı olduğu saptanmıştır

Keywords

Sporda kendine güven, doğrulayıcı faktör analizi, geçerlik ve güvenirlik, sporda pozitif gençlik gelişimi

A VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY STUDY OF THE SELF-CONFIDENCE SUBSCALE OF THE REVISED COMPETITIVE STATE ANXIETY-2

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine Turkish adapted form of “The self-confidence subscale of the Revised Competitive State Anxiety-2” (CSAI-2R; Cox, Martens, and Russel, 2003), which measures “trait sport confidence” (Vierimaa, Erickson, Côté, and Gilbert, 2012), with regard to construct validity and reliability. The instrument has one subscale and five items with four-point Likert scale. For this purpose, the instrument was firstly translated into Turkish and “cognitive interviews” were conducted with 12 athletes between 8 – 14 years of age in a competitive sport context to evaluate its comprehensibility (Kılıç and İnce, 2016). Then, the scale was applied to 182 female (47.6%) and 200 male (52.4%) athletes from variety of sports (N = 382; Mage = 13.90; SD = 1.66) and ages (12 to 18 years of age). The participants were from artistic gymnastics, track and field, basketball, box, soccer, wrestling, rhythmic gymnastics, tennis, volleyball and swimming. To evaluate the construct validity of the instrument, the dataset was examined by conducting Confirmatory Factor Analysis. For examining reliability, Cronbach’s Alpha value of the dataset was calculated. Findings (GFI = 0.99; CFI = 0.98; TLI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.07) indicated that there is an acceptable fit between the items of the instrument and the observed data. Cronbach’s Alpha value (α = 0.76) indicated that the instrument has acceptable internal consistency. In conclusion, “Turkish Version of theSelf-Confidence Subscale of the Revised Competitive State Anxiety-2”, which measures “trait sport confidence” is a valid and reliable instrument in measuring the youth’s perceptions of sport-related self-confidence

Keywords

Sport confidence, confirmatory factor analysis, validity and reliability, positive youth development in sport

References

• Allan, V., & Cote, J. (2016). A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Coaches' Observed Emotion-Behavior Profiles and Adolescent Athletes' Self-Reported De- velopmental Outcomes. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, doi:10.1080/10413200.2016.1162220 (3), 321.
• Arbuckle, J. L. "IBM SPSS Amos 20.0 [computer program]." New York: IBM (2011).
• Beatty, P. C., & Willis, G. B. (2007). Research synt- hesis: The practice of cognitive interviewing. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(2), 287-311.
• Bentler, PM, Bonett, DG (1980): Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
• Brislin Richard W (1980): Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In Triandis, H.C. & Berry, J.W., (Eds), Handbook of Cross-Cul- tural Psychology (Sayı 1, 389-444), Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1980.
• Collins, D (2001): Pretesting survey instruments: An overview of cognitive methods. Quality of Life Research. 12: 229-238, 2003.
• Côté, J, Gilbert, W (2009): An Integrative Defini- tion of Coaching Effectiveness and Expertise, Inter- national Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, 4(3), 307-323.
• Cox, R. H, Martens, MP and Russel, WD (2003): Measuring Anxiety in Athletics: The Revised Com- petitive State Anxiety Inventory-2, Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,25, 519-533.
• Desimone, LM, Le Floch, KC (2004): Are We As- king the Right Questions? Using Cognitive Inter- views to Improve Surveys in Education Research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(1), pp. 1-22.
• Erickson, K, Côté , J. (2016a): A season-long examination of the intervention tone of coach-ath- lete interactions and athlete development in youth sport. Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 264. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.006
• Erickson, K., & Côté, J. (2016b). An Exploratory Examination of Interpersonal Interactions between Pe- ers in Informal Sport Play Contexts. Plos One, 11(5), e0154275. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0154275
• Evans, B, Eys, M, Wolf, S (2013): Exploring the Nature of Interpersonal Influence in Elite Individual Sport Teams. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 25(4), 448-462.
• Gould, D., Hodge, K., Peterson, K., & Petlichkoff, L. (1987). Psychological foundations of coaching: Similarities and differences among intercollegiate wrestling coaches. The Sport Psychologist, 1(4), 293-308.
• Grove, J. R., & Hanrahan, S. J. (1988). Perceptions of mental training needs by elite field hockey pla- yers and their coaches. The Sport Psychologist, 2(3), 222-230.
• Hall, C. R., & Rodgers, W. M. (1989). Enhancing coaching effectiveness in figure skating through a mental skills training program. The Sport Psycholo- gist, 3(2), 142-154.
• Hu, L, Bentler, PM (1999): Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventi- onal criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
• Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Scientific Software Internatio- nal.
• Maruyama, GM (1998): Basics of Structural Equa- tion Modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Kılıç, K, İnce, ML (2016): Sporda Pozitif Gençlik Gelişimi Ölçeklerinin 8-14 Yaş Grubu Çocuk Ve Genç Sporcular Tarafından Anlaşılırlığının İncelen- mesi. Niğde Üniversitesi Beden Eğitimi Ve Spor Bi- limleri Dergisi.10(2), 213-225.
• Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press, 2011.
• Mardia, K. V. (1985). Mardia’s test of multinorma- lity. In S. Kotz & N. L. Johnson (Eds.), Encyclope- dia of statistical sciences (Vol. 5, pp. 217–221). New York: Wiley.
• Miller, K. (2014). Cognitive interviewing methodo- logy electronic resource. Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley & Sons, c2014.
• Nunnally, JC (1978): Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Sedgwick, A., Côté, J., & Dowd, J. (1997). Confi- dence building strategies used by Canadian high-le- vel rowing coaches. Avante, 3(3), 80-92.
• Schumacker, RE, Lomax, RG (1996): A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling. New Jersey: Erlbaum.
• Schumacker, RE, Lomax, RG (2004): A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling 2nd Ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Şimşek, Ö. F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş: Temel ilkeler ve LISREL uygulamaları. An- kara: Ekinoks.
• Tabachnick, BG, Fidell, LS (2013): Using Multiva- riate Statistics. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
• Vealey, RS (1986): Conceptualization of Sport- Confidence and Competitive Orientation: Prelimi- nary Investigation and Instrument Development, Jo- urnal of Sport Psychology, 8, 221-246.
• Vierimaa, M, Erickson, K, Côté, J, Gilbert, W (2012): Positive youth development: a measurement framework for sport. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 7(3), 601-614.
• Willis, GB (2014): Analysis of the Cognitive Interview in Questionnaire Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press, [2015].