Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

Başarılı ve Başarısız Hentbol Takımlarının Grup Sargınlığı, Kaygı, Güdülenme ve Yeterlik Düzeylerinin Karşılaştırılması

The Comparison of Group Cohesion, Anxiety, Motivation and Efficacy Level of Successful And Unsuccessful Handball Teams

Journal Name:

  • Hacettepe Üniversitesi Spor Bilimleri Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2012

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The purpose of this study was to investigate the comparison of group cohesion, anxiety, motivation, and efficacy levels between successful and unsuccessful teams. The total of 51 players from teams in the Turkish Men’s Handball First League in 2004-2005 participated in the study. Group Environment Questionnaire, Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2, Sport Competition Anxiety Test-A, Sport Motivation Scale, Self Efficacy Scale, Collective Efficacy Scale inventories were used to collect the data. The measurements were carry out in the first and second season of the league. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics and repeated measure analysis in two factor of variance (ANOVA). While examined the first and second measurements revealed dimension of significant differences attraction to task, attraction to social, integration to task, cognitive anxiety, self efficacy and collective efficacy, intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. Whereas there were no significant differences dimension of integration to social, somatic anxiety, self confidence and competitive trait anxiety and amotivation. Group x Time Interactions were significant for attraction to social, integration to task, integration to social, cognitive anxiety, self confidence, competitive state anxiety, collective efficacy. In conclusion; cohesiveness, anxiety, efficacy and motivation levels can change due to the rankings of teams in league.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışma, başarılı ve başarısız takımların Grup sargınlığı, Kaygı, Güdülenme düzeyi ve Yeterlik düzeylerini karşılaştırmayı amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmaya 2004-2005 yılında Türkiye Hentbol Erkekler Birinci Liginde ilk iki ve son iki sırada yer alan 4 takımdan toplam 51 oyuncu katılmıştır. Verilerin toplanmasında Grup Sargınlığı Envanteri, Yarışma Durumluk Kaygı Envanteri-2, Yarışma Kaygı Testi, Sporda Güdülenme Ölçeği, Öz-yeterlik Ölçeği ve Kolektif Yeterlik Ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Ölçümler liginin ilk ve ikinci yarısında gerçekleştirilmiştir. Verilerin analizinde betimsel istatistikler ve tekrarlı ölçümlerde iki faktörlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) kullanılmıştır. Birinci ve ikinci devre ölçümleri incelendiğinde; görev çekiciliği, sosyal çekicilik, görev bütünlüğü, bilişsel kaygı, öz-yeterlik ve kolektif yeterlik, içsel motivasyon ve dışsal motivasyon boyutları açısından istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark olduğu belirlenmiştir. Buna karşın, sosyal bütünlük, bedensel kaygı, kendine güven ve amotivasyon boyutlarında birinci ve ikinci ölçümler arasında anlamlı fark bulunamamıştır. Başarılı ve başarısız hentbol takımlarının birinci ölçümden ikinci ölçüme kadar Sosyal çekicilik, Görev bütünlüğü, Sosyal bütünlük, Bilişsel kaygı, Kendine güven, Sürekli yarışma kaygısı, Kolektif yeterlik puanlarında meydana gelen değişim ise anlamlı bulunmuştur. Sonuç olarak, takımların lig sıralamasındaki yerine ve zamana göre de sargınlık, kaygı, yeterlik ve motivasyon düzeyleri değişebilmektedir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastrmx_152775_23_pp_129-143.pdf
  • 3
129–143
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Bandura A. (1977). Self efficacy: Toward a unifiying
theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review.
84, 191-215.
2. Carron AV, Widmeyer WN, Brawley LR. (1985). The
development of ınstrument to assess cohesion in sport
teams: The group environment questionnaire. Journal
of Sport Psychology, 7, 244-266.
3. Carron AV, Prapaessis H. (1997). Self-presentation
and group influence. Small Group Research, 28, 500-
516.
4. Carron AV, Hausenblas HA. (1998). Group Dynamics in
Sport (2nd ed.) Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information
Technology.
5. Carron AV, Widmeyer WN, Brawley LR. (1998). The
meuserement of cohesiveness in sport groups. (JL
Duda, Der.), Advances in Sport and Exercise Psychology
Measurment (pp. 213-226). Morganton, WV: Fitness
Information Technology.
6. Carron AV, Bray RS, Eys AM. (2002). Team cohesion
and team success in sport. Journal of Sport Sciences.
20, 119-126
7. Collins D. (1995). Psychophsiology and sport
performance. (SJ Biddle, Der.) European Perspective
on Exercise and Sport Psychology, s.154-178.
Champaing, IL, Human Kinetics.
8. Davids K, Nutter A. (1988). The cohesion-performance
relationship of English national league volleybol teams.
Journal of Human Movement Studies, 15, 205-213.
9. Deci EL, Ryan RM. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and
Self Determination in Human Behavior. New York:
Plenum Press.
10. Eren E. (2001). Örgütsel Davranış ve Yönetim Psikolojisi
(7. Baskı). İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım A.Ş.
11. Festinger L, Schachter S, Back K. (1950). Social
Pressures in İnformal Groups: A Study of Human
Factors Inhousting. New York: Harper Row.
12. Feltz LD, Lirgg DC. (1998). Perceived team and player
efficacy in hockey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83-
4, 557-564.
13. Gill DL. (1986). Psychological Dynamics of Sport.
Champaign, Illinois: Human Kinetics Publisher Inc.
14. Grieve FG, Whealan JP, Meyers AW. (2000).
An experimental examination of the cohesionperformance
relationship in an interactive team sport.
Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 12, 219-235
15. Hogg MA. (1992). The Social Psychology of Group
Cohesiveness: From Attraction to Social İdentity,
London: Harvester and Wheatscheaf..
16. Howell W, Dipboye R. (1986). Essential of industrial
organizational psychology (3rd Ed.) Chicago: The
Dorsey Pres..
17. Johnston WA. (1967). Individual performance and
self-evaluation in a simulated team. Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance, 2, 309-328
18. Koruç, Z. (1998). Spor Bilimleri V. Kongresi: CSAI-
2’nin Türkiye Uyarlaması, Ön Çalışma I”.. Ankara:
Hacettepe Üniversitesi.
19. Martens R. (1977). Sport Competition Anxiety Test.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
20. Martens R, Vealey RS, Burton D. (1990). Competetive
Anxiety in Sports. Champaign: Human Kinetics Books.
21. Martin KA, Hall CR. (1997). Situational and
interpersonal moderators of sport competion state
anxiety. Journal of Sport Behavior, 20, 435-446.
22. Matheson H, Mathes S. (1997). The effect of winning
and losing on female interactice and coactive team
cohesion. Journal of Sport Behavior, 20 (3), 284-299.
Hentbol’de Grup Sargınlığı ve Etki Eden Değişkenler 143
23. Mudrack, PE. (1991). Defining group cohesiveness: A
legacy of confusion? Small Group Bahavior, 21, 139-155.
24. Mullen B, Copper C. (1994). The relation between
group cohesiveness and performance: An integration.
Psychological Bulletin, 115, 210-227.
25. Öcel H. (2002). Takım sporu yapan oyuncularda
kollektif yeterlik öz-yeterlik ve sargınlık ile başarı
algı ve beklentileri arasındaki ilişkiler. Yayınlanmamış
Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi. Sosyal
Bilimler Enstitüsü.
26. Öner N, Le Compte A. (1985). Süreksiz Durumluk/
Sürekli Kaygı Envanteri El Kitabı. İstanbul: Boğaziçi
Üniversitesi Yayınları
27. Paskevich DM, Brawley LR, Dorsch LR, Widmeyer
WN. (1995). Implications of indiviual and group level
analyses apllied to the study of collective efficacy and
cohesion. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 7, S- 95.
28. Pelletier LG, Fortier MS, Vallerand RJ, Tuson
KM, Briere NM, Blais MR. (1995). Toward a new
measurement of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic
motivation and amotivation in sports: The Sport
Motivation Scale (SMS). Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 17, 35-53.
29. Riggs ML, Warka J, Babasa B, Betancour R,
Hooker S. (1994). Development and validation of
self-efficacy and outcome expectancy scales for jobrelated
applications. Educational and Psychological
Measuurement, 54, 793-802.
30. Shanghi GM, Carron AV. (1987). Group cohesion and
its relationship with performance and satisifaction
among high school basketball players. Canadian
Journal of Sport Sciences. 12, 20.
31. Singer NR, Murphey M, Tennant KL. (1993) Handbook
of Research on Sport Psychology. New York: Macmillan.
32. Slater MR, Sewell DF. (1994). An examination of
the cohesion-performance relationship in university
hockey teams. Journal of Sports Sciences, 12, 423-431.
33. Spink KS. (1990). Group cohesion and collective
efficacy of voleybol teams. Journal of Sport and
Exercise Psychology,12, 301-311.
34. Kazak Z. (2004). “Sporda Güdülenme Ölçeği –SGÖ-
“nin Türk Sporcular İçin Güvenirlik ve Geçerlik
Çalışması. Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 15 (4), 191-206
35. Wann LD. (1997). Sport Psychology, Upper Saddle
River: Prentice Hall, Inc.
36. Widmeyer WN, Williams JM. (1991). Predicting
cohesion in a coacting sport. Small Group Research,
22, 548-570.
37. Williams JM, Widmeyer WN. (1991). The cohesionperformance
outcome relationship in a coacting sport.
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 13, 364-371.
38. Zaichkowsky LD, Baltzell A. (2001). Arousal and
Performance. (RN Singer, HJ Hansenblas ve C Janelly,
Der.). Handbook of Sport Psychology (2nd ed.), s.319-
334. New York: Wiley.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com