Sporda taktiksel beceriler envanteri’nin (STBE) Türkçe uyarlama çalışması

Öz

Amaç: Bu araştırmanın amacı Taktiksel Beceriler Envanterini (STBE) Türkçeye uyarlamak, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışma sonuçlarını ortaya koymaktır.

Materyal ve Metot: Bu amaç doğrultusunda araştırmaya farklı takım spor branşlarında (futbol, basketbol, hentbol, rugby), lisanslı aktif olarak spor hayatına devam eden yaşları 19-30 arasında değişen 154’ü erkek (X_yaş=22,45±2,88), 71’i kadın (X_yaş=21,25±2,04) olmak üzere toplam 225 sporcu gönüllü olarak katılmıştır. Envanter 22 madde ve 4 alt boyuttan (Pozisyon Alma ve Karar Verme, Top Hareketlerine Dair Bilgi Sahibi Olma, Rakiplerini Tanıma, Değişen Durumlarda Hareket Etme oluşmaktadır ve 6’lı Likert tipinde değerlendirilmektedir. Verilerin analizinde envanterin yapı geçerliğine ilişkin olarak Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi iç tutarlığın belirlenmesi için ise, Cronbach Alfa güvenirlik analizi ve madde toplam test korelasyonları incelenmiştir. 

Bulgular: Doğrulayıcı faktör analiz sonuçlarında uyum iyiliği indeks değerleri, x²/sd(x²=603,89, sd=164)=2,97, RMSEA=0,094, RMR=0,64, SRMR=0,73, CFI=0,94, NFI=0,91, NNFI=0,93, IFI=0,94 olarak belirlenmiştir. Envanterin iç tutarlılık kat sayılarının ise, 0,70 ile 0,93 arasında değiştiği belirlenmiştir. 

Sonuç: Sonuç olarak, “Taktiksel Beceriler Envanteri” Türkçe versiyonunun sporcular için geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçüm aracı olduğu söylenebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Taktiksel Beceriler,Geçerlik,Güvenirlik

Turkish adaptation Study of the inventory of tactical skills in sports

Öz

Aim: The purpose of this research is to adapt the Tactical Skills Inventory-TACSIS to Turkish, and to show validity and reliability results at the sport.

Method: For this purpose, a total of 225 athletes, active in different sports branches, (football, basketball, handball, rugby) participated in the study voluntarily,154 of whom were male (M_age=22.45±2.88), and 71 of whom were female (M_age=21.25±2.04). TACSIS consists of 22 items and 4 sub-dimensions (Positioning and Deciding, Knowing About Ball Action, Knowing About Other, Acting in Changing Situation) and is evaluated as 6 Likert type. In the analysis of data, in order to test the validity of the scale, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (DFA), Cronbach-Alfa reliability coefficient and item test correlations were examined. 

Results:  In the confirmatory factor analysis results, the goodness of fit index values were determined as x²/sd (x²=603.89, sd=164)=2.97, RMSEA=0.094, RMR=0.64, SRMR=0.73, CFI=0.94, NFI=0.91, NNFI=0.93, IFI=0.94. It was determined that the internal consistency coefficients of the questionnaire changed between 0.70 and 0.93. 

Conclusion: As a result, it can be said that the Turkish version of Tactical Skills Inventory-TACSIS is a valid and reliable measurement tool for athletes.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tactical Skills,Validity,Reliability

Kaynakça

1. Allard, F., Deakin, J., Parker, S., & Rodgers, W. (1993). Declarative knowledge in skilled motor performance: by product or constituent? In Advances in Psychology. 102, 95-107.
2. Alpar, R. (2001). Spor Bilimlerinde Uygulamalı İstatistik. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
3. Bard, C., Fleury, M., & Goulet, C. (1994). Relationship between perceptual strategies and response adequacy in sport situations. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 25, 266-281.
4. Bjurwill, C. (1993). Read and react: the football formula. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76, 1383-1386.
5. Brislin, RW. (1986). The Wording and Translation of Research Instruments. (WJ Lonner, JW Berry, eds.) Field Methods in Educational Research. 1st ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
6. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2014). Sosyal Bilimler için Veri Analizi El Kitabı: İstatistik, Araştırma Deseni SPSS Uygulamaları ve Yorum Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
7. Byrne, B., M. (2010). Testing for the factorial validity of a theoretical construct. Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Routledge.
8. Chamberlain, C. J., & Coelho, A. J. (1993). The perceptual side of action: Decision-making in sport. In Advances in Psychology. 102, 135-157.

9. DeVellis, R, F. (2016). Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Sage Publications.
10. Elferink-Gemser, M. T., Visscher, C., Richart, H., & Lemmink, K. A. P. M. (2004). Development of the tactical skills inventory for sports. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 99(3), 883-895.
11. Elferink-Gemser, M., Visscher, C., Lemmink, K., & Mulder, T. (2004). Relation between multidimensional performance characteristics and level of performance in talented youth field hockey players. Journal of Sports Sciences, 22(11), 1053-1063.
12. French, K. E., & Thomas, J. R. (1987). The relation of knowledge development to children’s basketball performance. Journal of Sport Psychology, 9, 15-32.
13. Grehaigne J.F. & Godbout P. (1995). Tactical knowledge in team sports from a constructivist and cognitive perspective. Quest, 47, 490-505.
14. Hambleton, R.K. & Patsula, L. (1999). Increasing the validity of adapted tests: Myths to be avoided and guidelines for improving test adaptation practices. Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 1(1),1-13.
15. Helsen, W. F., & Starkes, J. L. (1999). A multidimensional approach to skilled perception and performance in sport. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 13(1), 1-27.
16. Harrington, D. (2009). Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Oxford University Press, New York.
17. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
18. Kline, RB. (2015). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. Guilford Press, New York.
19. McMorris, T., & Graydon, J. (1997). The effect of exercise on cognitive performance in soccer-specific tests. Journal of Sports Sciences, 15(5), 459-468.
20. McPherson, S. L., & Thomas, J. R. (1989). Relation of knowledge and performance in boys' tennis: Age and expertise. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 48(2), 190-211.
21. McPherson, S. L. (1994). The development of sport expertise: Mapping the tactical domain. Quest, 46(2), 223-240.
22. Nougier, V., & Rossi, B. (1999). The development of expertise in the orienting of attention. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 30, 246-260.
23. Nunnally, JC., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New York.
24. Starkes, J. L., & Deakin, J. (1984). Perception in sport: A cognitive approach to skilled performance. Cognitive Sport Psychology, 115-128.
25. Starkes, F., L. (1987). Skill in field hockey: The nature of the cognitive advantage. Journal of Sport Psychology, 9, 146- 160.
26. Steiger, JH. (2000). Point estimation, hypothesis testing, and interval estimation using the RMSEA: some comments and a reply to Hayduk and Glaser. Structural Equation Modeling 7(2):149-62.
27. Şencan, H. (2005). Sosyal ve Davranışsal Ölçümlerde Güvenirlik ve Geçerlik. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları.
28. Tezbaşaran, A. (1996). Likert Tipi Ölçek Hazırlama Kılavuzu. Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları.
29. Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
30. Williams, A., M., Davids, K., Burwitz. L, & Williams, J. G. (1993). Cognitive knowledge and soccer performance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76, 579-593.
31. Williams, M., & Davids, K. (1995). Declarative knowledge in sport: a by-product of experience or a characteristic of expertise. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 17, 259-275.
32. Williams, A. M., & Ford P. R. (2013). “Game intelligence”: Anticipation and decision making. In A. M. Williams (Ed.), Science and soccer III (pp. 105–121). London, UK: Routledge.