Exploring the difference of decision-making style among hybrid, individual and partner sports

Nishla ., Dr. Manjit Kaur
{"title":"Exploring the difference of decision-making style among hybrid, individual and partner sports","authors":"Nishla ., Dr. Manjit Kaur","doi":"10.33545/27068919.2023.v5.i9a.1052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Study Aim: There are several factors that affect an athlete's decision while making it in a sports context. These are the factors that are in the athlete's immediate environment, including the coach, their teammates, their parents, and other support networks. For a number of reasons, sports provide an outstanding setting for the study of decision making. Sports decision-making includes a variety of decision agents (coaches, officials, players, fans, etc.), duties like play-calling and ball distribution, penalty kicks, and instances within play, such as timeouts and player substitutions. The purpose of this study was to explore the differences of decision-making style among hybrid, individual and partner sportsMaterial and Methods: A quasi-experimental study was conducted on one hundreed sixty-two (N=162) female subjects (age 21-25 years) from Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab, India. All the subjects were informed about the objective and protocol of the study. The subjects were purposively divided into three groups: Group-A: Hybrid Sports (N1=49), Group-B: Individual Sports (N2=91) and Group-C: Partner Sports (N3=22). Purposive sampling was used keeping in view of administrative feasibility. The data was collected through the administration of Decision-Making Style Questionnaire as constructed by Scot and Bruce (1995).Statistical Analysis: G*Power version 3.1.9.7 was used to analyze the power and to compute sample size with graphics options. The normality of the data was checked by using the Shapiro-Wilk Test of Normality. Under the data analysis, exploration of data was made with descriptive statistics and graphical analysis. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used for the present investigation. The level of significance was set at 0.05. The statistical techniques were used to analyze the data on Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 26.0. Results: The result of the study shows that the Rational: The f-ratio is 2.034, and the p-value is .134. The result is not significant at p.05, Avoidant: The f-ratio is .422, and the p-value is .657. The result is not significant at p.05, Intuitive: The f-ratio is .003, and the p-value is .997. The result is not significant at p.05, Dependent: The f-ratio is .054, and the p-value is .948. The result is not significant at p.05, Spontaneous: The f-ratio is .774, and the p-value is .463. The result is not significant at p.05. and Decision-Making Style: The f-ratio is .155, and the p-value is .857. The result is not significant at p.05.","PeriodicalId":484107,"journal":{"name":"International journal of advanced academic studies","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of advanced academic studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33545/27068919.2023.v5.i9a.1052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Study Aim: There are several factors that affect an athlete's decision while making it in a sports context. These are the factors that are in the athlete's immediate environment, including the coach, their teammates, their parents, and other support networks. For a number of reasons, sports provide an outstanding setting for the study of decision making. Sports decision-making includes a variety of decision agents (coaches, officials, players, fans, etc.), duties like play-calling and ball distribution, penalty kicks, and instances within play, such as timeouts and player substitutions. The purpose of this study was to explore the differences of decision-making style among hybrid, individual and partner sportsMaterial and Methods: A quasi-experimental study was conducted on one hundreed sixty-two (N=162) female subjects (age 21-25 years) from Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab, India. All the subjects were informed about the objective and protocol of the study. The subjects were purposively divided into three groups: Group-A: Hybrid Sports (N1=49), Group-B: Individual Sports (N2=91) and Group-C: Partner Sports (N3=22). Purposive sampling was used keeping in view of administrative feasibility. The data was collected through the administration of Decision-Making Style Questionnaire as constructed by Scot and Bruce (1995).Statistical Analysis: G*Power version 3.1.9.7 was used to analyze the power and to compute sample size with graphics options. The normality of the data was checked by using the Shapiro-Wilk Test of Normality. Under the data analysis, exploration of data was made with descriptive statistics and graphical analysis. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used for the present investigation. The level of significance was set at 0.05. The statistical techniques were used to analyze the data on Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 26.0. Results: The result of the study shows that the Rational: The f-ratio is 2.034, and the p-value is .134. The result is not significant at p.05, Avoidant: The f-ratio is .422, and the p-value is .657. The result is not significant at p.05, Intuitive: The f-ratio is .003, and the p-value is .997. The result is not significant at p.05, Dependent: The f-ratio is .054, and the p-value is .948. The result is not significant at p.05, Spontaneous: The f-ratio is .774, and the p-value is .463. The result is not significant at p.05. and Decision-Making Style: The f-ratio is .155, and the p-value is .857. The result is not significant at p.05.
探讨混合运动、个人运动和伙伴运动中决策风格的差异
背景和研究目的:在运动环境中,有几个因素会影响运动员的决定。这些因素存在于运动员的直接环境中,包括教练、队友、父母和其他支持网络。由于许多原因,体育运动为研究决策提供了一个很好的环境。体育决策包括各种各样的决策主体(教练、官员、球员、球迷等),职责,如比赛召唤和球分配,点球,以及比赛中的实例,如暂停和球员换人。本研究的目的是探讨混合运动、个人运动和伙伴运动之间决策风格的差异。材料和方法:对来自印度旁遮普邦阿姆利则Guru Nanak Dev大学的162名(N=162)女性受试者(年龄21-25岁)进行了准实验研究。所有受试者都被告知研究的目的和方案。将受试者有意分为3组:a组:混合运动组(N1=49), b组:个人运动组(N2=91), c组:伙伴运动组(N3=22)。考虑到管理的可行性,采用有目的的抽样。数据的收集是通过管理决策风格问卷,由Scot和Bruce(1995)构建。统计分析:使用G*Power版本3.1.9.7进行功率分析,并通过图形选项计算样本量。采用夏皮罗-威尔克正态性检验检验数据的正态性。在数据分析的基础上,通过描述性统计和图形化分析对数据进行挖掘。本研究采用方差分析(ANOVA)。显著性水平设为0.05。采用SPSS 26.0版本的统计方法对数据进行分析。结果:研究结果表明:理性:f值为2.034,p值为0.134。结果在p.05不显著,回避者:f比为.422,p值为.657。结果在p.05处不显著,直观:f比为0.003,p值为0.997。结果在p.05处不显著,依赖:f比为0.054,p值为0.948。自发性:f比为0.774,p值为0.463。p < 0.05,差异无统计学意义。决策风格:f值为0.155,p值为0.857。p < 0.05,差异无统计学意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信