ANTRENÖRÜN KİŞİLERARASI DAVRANIŞLARININ DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ: GEÇERLİK VE GÜVENİRLİK ÇALIŞMASI

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı Bhavsar ve arkadaşları (2019) tarafından geliştirilen Üç Boyutlu Kişiler Arası Antrenör Davranışları Ölçeği’nin Türkçe versiyonunun geçerliği ve güvenirliğinin test edilmesidir. Bu ölçek, sporcu algısına göre antrenörün temel psikolojik ihtiyaçları destekleyici, engelleyici ve bu ihtiyaçlara ilgisiz davranışlarını ölçmektedir. Araştırmaya, 225 erkek ve 125 kadın olmak üzere toplam 350 (X̄yaş=18.74±4.35) sporcu katılmıştır. Katılımcılara kişisel bilgi formu, Üç Boyutlu Kişiler Arası Antrenör Davranışları Ölçeği ve Antrenör Davranışları Değerlendirme Ölçeği’nin olumlu ve olumsuz antrenör davranışları alt boyutları uygulanmıştır. Veriler AMOS 20 programında doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ile incelenmiştir. Yakınsak ve ıraksak geçerlik için değişkenler arasındaki Pearson korelasyon katsayıları ve ortalama açıklanan varyans (AVE) değerleri hesaplanmıştır. Güvenirliğin değerlendirilmesi için Cronbach alfa iç tutarlılık ve bileşik güvenirlik (CR) değerleri kullanılmıştır. Analizler sonucunda, faktör yükleri çok düşük olan 9 ve 10. maddelerin silinmesi ile model uyum indeksleri kabul edilebilir düzeye ulaşmıştır (χ2/sd= 453.372/165=2.75; RMSEA=.07, NFI=.90; NNFI= .92, CFI=.93, SRMR=.046). Ölçeğin “ihtiyaç engelleyici davranış” ve “ihtiyaca ilgisiz davranış” boyutları olumlu antrenör davranışları ile negatif yönde (p<.05, ıraksak geçerlik); olumsuz antrenör davranışları ile pozitif yönde ilişkilidir (p<.05, yakınsak geçerlik). “İhtiyaç destekleyici davranış” boyutu ise olumlu antrenör davranışları ile pozitif olarak (p<.05, yakınsak geçerlik); olumsuz antrenör davranışları ile negatif olarak ilişkilidir (p<.05, ıraksak geçerlik). AVE değerleri .51 ile .56 arasındadır. Cronbach alfa ve CR değerleri ise .86 ile .91 arasındadır. Sonuç olarak, Üç Boyutlu Kişiler Arası Antrenör Davranışları Ölçeği’nin Türkçe versiyonu sporcuların algısına göre antrenörlerin kişiler arası davranışlarını değerlendirmek amacı ile kullanılabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Temel psikolojik ihtiyaçlar
• antrenör davranışı
• hür irade kuramı
• ölçek

MEASURING COACHES’ INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS: VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY STUDY

Öz

The aim of this study was to test the validity and reliability of Turkish version of Tripartite Measure of Interpersonal Behaviors-Coach (TMIB-C) which was developed by Bhavsar et al. (2019). The scale measures athletes' perception of coaches' need-supportive, need-thwarting and need-indifferent behaviors. Two hundred twenty-five male and 125 females, a total of 350 (Mage=18.74±4.35) athletes participated in the study. Personal information form, Tripartite Measure of Interpersonal Behaviors-Coach along with positive and negative behavior sub-dimensions of Coaching Behavior Scale for Sport were administered to the participants. Data were analyzed by confirmatory factor analysis in AMOS 20. Pearson correlation coefficients among the variables and average variance extracted (AVE) values were calculated for convergent and discriminant validity. Reliability was tested by Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability coefficients. Model fit indices reached the acceptable level with deletion of the items 9 and 10 which had low factor loadings (χ2/df=453.372/165=2.75; RMSEA=.07, NFI=.90; NNFI=.92, CFI=.93, AGFI=.85; SRMR=.046). “Need thwarting” and “need indifference” behaviors negatively correlated with positive coaching behaviors (p<.05, discriminant validity), whereas these behaviors positively correlated with negative coaching behaviors (p<.05, convergent validity). While “need supporting behavior” positively correlated with positive coaching behaviors (p<.05, convergent validity), it negatively correlated with negative coaching behaviors (p<.05, discriminant validity). AVE values were between .51 and .56. Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability coefficients were between .86 and .91. The findings suggest that, Turkish version of Tripartite Measure of Interpersonal Behaviors-Coach can be used to measure athletes’ perception of coaches’ interpersonal behaviors.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Basic psychological needs
• coaching behavior
• self-determination theory
• scale.

Kaynakça

1. Adie, J.W., Duda, J.L., Ntoumanis, N. (2008). Autonomy support, basic need satisfaction and the optimal functioning of adult male and female sport participants: A test of basic needs theory. Motivation and Emotion, 32(3), 189-199.
2. Afthanorhan, W. M. A. B. W. (2013). A comparison of partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) and covariance based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM) for confirmatory factor analysis. International Journal of Engineering Science and Innovative Technology, 2(5), 198-205.
3. Aksu, G., Eser, M.T. Güzeller, C.O. (2017). Açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ile yapısal eşitlik modeli uygulamaları. İstanbul: Detay Yayıncılık.
4. Bartholomew, K.J., Arnold, R., Hampson, R.J., Fletcher, D. (2017). Organizational stressors and basic psychological needs: The mediating role of athletes' appraisal mechanisms. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 27(12), 2127-2139.
5. Bartholomew, K.J., Ntoumanis, N., Ryan, R.M., Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C. (2011). Psychological need thwarting in the sport context: Assessing the darker side of athletic experience. Journal of sport and exercise psychology, 33(1), 75-102.
6. Beaton, D.E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., Ferraz, M. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186-3191.
7. Berntsen, H., Ivarsson, A. Kristiansen, E. (2019). Need-supportiveness and athlete well-being: Coaches’ competence-support at risk in the elite sport context throughout the season. Current Issues in Sport Science, 4:010. doi: 10.15203/CISS_2019.010.
8. Bhavsar, N., Ntoumanis, N., Quested, E., Gucciardi, D.F., Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C., Ryan, R.M., ... Bartholomew, K. J. (2019). Conceptualizing and testing a new tripartite measure of coach interpersonal behaviors. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 44, 107-120.

9. Brislin, R.W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. In W. J. Lonner, J. W. Berry (Eds.). Field Methods in Educational Research (p.137-164). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
10. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Faktör analizi: Temel kavramlar ve ölçek geliştirmede kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 32(32), 470-483.
11. Camiré, M., Rathwell, S., Turgeon, S., Kendellen, K. (2019). Coach–athlete relationships, basic psychological needs satisfaction and thwarting, and the teaching of life skills in Canadian high school sport. International journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 14(5), 591-606.
12. Cheon, S.H., Reeve, J., Lee, Y., Ntoumanis, N., Gillet, N., Kim, B.R., Song, Y.G. (2019). Expanding autonomy psychological need states from two (satisfaction, frustration) to three (dissatisfaction): A classroom-based intervention study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 11, 685–702.
13. Converse, J. M., Presser, S. (1986). Survey questions. Handcrafting the standardized questionnaire. Newbury Park: Sage Publications Inc.
14. Cote, J., Yardley, J., Hay, J., Sedgwick, W., Baker, J. (1999). An exploratory examination of the coaching behavior scale for sport. Avante, 5(2), 82–92.
15. Çapık, C., Gözüm, S., Aksayan, S. (2018). Kültürlerarası ölçek uyarlama aşamaları, dil ve kültür uyarlaması: Güncellenmiş rehber. Florence Nightingale Journal of Nursing, 26(3), 199-210. Deci, E. L., Ryan, R.M. (1985). Cognitive evaluation theory. In Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior (pp. 43-85). Springer, Boston, MA.
16. Deci, E. L., Ryan, R.M., Williams, G.C. (1996). Need satisfaction and the self-regulation of learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8(3), 165-183.
17. Fayers, P. M., Machin, D. (2000). Quality of life. Assessment, analysis and interpretation. New York: Wiley
18. Garrido, L. E., Abad, F. J., Ponsoda, V. (2016). Are fit indices really fit to estimate the number of factors with categorical variables? Some cautionary findings via Monte Carlo simulation. Psychological methods, 21(1), 93.
19. Gefen, D., Straub, D. (2005). A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-Graph: Tutorial and annotated example. Communications of the Association for Information systems, 16(1), 5.
20. Gliner, J.A., Morgan, G.A., Leech, N.L. (2015). Research methods in applied settings: An integrated approach to design and analysis. 3rd edition Routledge, New York.
21. Gürbüz, S., Şahin, F. (2014). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
22. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. Anderson. RE. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis. New Jersey, Pearson Prentice Hall.
23. Hodge, K., Lonsdale, C., Ng, J.Y. (2008). Burnout in elite rugby: Relationships with basic psychological needs fulfilment. Journal of Sports Sciences, 26(8), 835-844.
24. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., Mullen, M.R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6,53–60.
25. John, O. P., V. Benet-Martinez (2000). Measurement: Reliability, construct validation, and scale construction. In C. M. Judd (ed.), The Handbook of Research Methods in Personality and Social Psychology: 339–369. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26. Jõesaar, H., Hein, V., Hagger, M. S. (2011). Peer influence on young athletes’ need satisfaction, intrinsic motivation and persistence in sport: A 12-month prospective study. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12(5), 500-508.
27. Kaye, M.P., Lowe, K., Dorsch, T.E. (2019). Dyadic examination of parental support, basic needs satisfaction, and student–athlete development during emerging adulthood. Journal of Family Issues, 40(2), 240-263.
28. Ng, J.Y.Y., Lonsdale, C., Hodge, K. (2011). The Basic Needs Satisfaction in Sport Scale (BNSSS): Instrument development and initial validity evidence. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12, 257-264.
29. Ntoumanis, N., Standage, M. (2009). Morality in sport: A self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 21(4), 365-380.
30. Nunnally, J.C., Bernstein, I.H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
31. Pulido, J.J., Sánchez-Oliva, D., Leo, F.M., Sánchez-Cano, J., García-Calvo, T. (2018). Development and validation of coaches’ interpersonal style questionnaire. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 22(1), 25-37.
32. Quested, E., Ntoumanis, N., Stenling, A., Thogersen-Ntoumani, C., Hancox, J.E. (2018). The need-relevant instructor behaviors scale: development and initial validation. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 40(5), 259-268.
33. Quested, E., Ntoumanis, N., Viladrich, C., Haug, E., Ommundsen, Y., Van Hoye, A., ... Duda, J.L. (2013). Intentions to drop-out of youth soccer: A test of the basic needs theory among European youth from five countries. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11(4), 395-407.
34. Rathwell, S., Camiré, M., Kendellen, K., Turgeon, S. (2018). Coach-athlete relationship, basic psychological needs satisfaction, and life skills development in Canadian high school sport. Journal of Exercise, Movement, and Sport (SCAPPS refereed abstracts repository), 50(1), 177-177.
35. Reeve, J., Cheon, S. H., Yu, T. H. (2020). An autonomy-supportive intervention to develop students’ resilience by boosting agentic engagement. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 44(4), 325-338.
36. Rocchi, M., Pelletier, L., Desmarais, P. (2017). The validity of the Interpersonal Behaviors Questionnaire (IBQ) in sport. Measurement in physical education and exercise science, 21(1), 15-25.
37. Rodrigues, F., Macedo, R. (2021). Exercise Promotion: Reviewing the Importance of Health Professionals’ Interpersonal Behaviors on Exercisers’ Basic Psychological Needs. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 128(2), 800-812.
38. Ryan, R.M., Deci, E.L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67.
39. Sari, I. (2015). Satisfaction of basic psychological needs and goal orientation in young athletes: A test of basic psychological needs theory. Kinesiology, 47(2.), 159-168
40. 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.
41. Schmitt, N. (1996). Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychological Assessment, 8(4), 350- 353.
42. Shannon, S., Prentice, G., Breslin, G. (2021). Athletes’ Psychological Needs and Coaches’ Interpersonal Behaviors: A Within-Person Latent Profile Analysis. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 43(1), 71-82.
43. Stevens, J. P. (2009). Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences. 5th edition, Routledge, London.
44. Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal Eşitlik Modelleri: Temel Kavramlar ve Örnek Uygulamalar [Structural equation modeling: Basic concepts and applications]. Turkish Psychological Review, 3(6), 49–74.
45. Taylor, I. M., Bruner, M.W. (2012). The social environment and developmental experiences in elite youth soccer. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13(4), 390-396.
46. Teixeira, P.J., Carraça, E.V., Markland, D., Silva, M.N., Ryan, R.M. (2012). Exercise, physical activity, and self-determination theory: a systematic review. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 9(1), 1-30.
47. Vansteenkiste, M., Ryan, R.M. (2013). On psychological growth and vulnerability: basic psychological need satisfaction and need frustration as a unifying principle. Journal of Psychotherapy İntegration, 23(3), 263-280.
48. Wild, D., Grove, A., Martin, M., Eremenco, S., McElroy, S., Verjee-Lorenz, A., Erikson, P. (2005). Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value in Health, 8(2), 94-104.
49. Yapar, A., İnce, M.L. (2014). Sporcular için antrenör davranışlarını değerlendirme ölçeğinin Türkçe uyarlaması (SADDÖ): geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 25(4), 203-212.
50. Yıldız, M., Şenel, E. (2018). Sporda Kişiler Arası Davranışlar Ölçeği (SKD) Türkçe Formunun Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. Gazi Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 23(4), 219-231.