Reliability and Validity of an Agility Assessment for Dancers: The Hexagon Test.

IF 1.5 Q3 SPORT SCIENCES
Cansu Akkuş, Bahar Kara, Taha İbrahim Yıldız, Volga Bayrakcı Tunay, İrem Düzgün
{"title":"Reliability and Validity of an Agility Assessment for Dancers: The Hexagon Test.","authors":"Cansu Akkuş, Bahar Kara, Taha İbrahim Yıldız, Volga Bayrakcı Tunay, İrem Düzgün","doi":"10.1177/1089313X261472622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Agility is a fundamental motor skill in dance performance, enabling rapid and efficient changes of direction in response to choreographic, musical, and environmental demands. Despite its importance, there is no standardized, validated field-based agility test specifically established for dancers. This study aimed to evaluate the test-retest reliability, construct validity, and discriminative validity of the Hexagon Test in dancers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional test-retest study included 32 trained dancers (12 hip-hop, 10 ballet, and 10 Latin dancers; 20 females, 12 males; age: 23.0 ± 3.9 years) and 42 sedentary individuals (24 females, 18 males; age: 22.9 ± 2.9 years). Agility was assessed using the Hexagon Test (time in seconds) and the Edgren Side Step Test (ESST; distance in meters). All participants completed 2 testing sessions separated by 1 week under standardized conditions. Test-retest reliability was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC). Construct validity was examined using Pearson correlation analysis between the Hexagon Test and ESST. Discriminative validity was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Hexagon Test demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.93-0.97). A strong negative correlation with the ESST (r = -0.72, <i>P</i> < .001) supported construct validity. ROC analysis revealed excellent discriminative validity, with an area under the curve of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84-0.97), indicating a 91% probability of correctly distinguishing dancers from sedentary individuals.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Hexagon Test is a reliable and valid field-based tool for assessing agility in dancers. Its strong psychometric properties and practical feasibility support its use in dance performance screening and return-to-dance settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":46421,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dance Medicine & Science","volume":" ","pages":"1089313X261472622"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dance Medicine & Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1089313X261472622","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Agility is a fundamental motor skill in dance performance, enabling rapid and efficient changes of direction in response to choreographic, musical, and environmental demands. Despite its importance, there is no standardized, validated field-based agility test specifically established for dancers. This study aimed to evaluate the test-retest reliability, construct validity, and discriminative validity of the Hexagon Test in dancers.

Methods: This cross-sectional test-retest study included 32 trained dancers (12 hip-hop, 10 ballet, and 10 Latin dancers; 20 females, 12 males; age: 23.0 ± 3.9 years) and 42 sedentary individuals (24 females, 18 males; age: 22.9 ± 2.9 years). Agility was assessed using the Hexagon Test (time in seconds) and the Edgren Side Step Test (ESST; distance in meters). All participants completed 2 testing sessions separated by 1 week under standardized conditions. Test-retest reliability was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC). Construct validity was examined using Pearson correlation analysis between the Hexagon Test and ESST. Discriminative validity was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

Results: The Hexagon Test demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.93-0.97). A strong negative correlation with the ESST (r = -0.72, P < .001) supported construct validity. ROC analysis revealed excellent discriminative validity, with an area under the curve of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84-0.97), indicating a 91% probability of correctly distinguishing dancers from sedentary individuals.

Conclusion: The Hexagon Test is a reliable and valid field-based tool for assessing agility in dancers. Its strong psychometric properties and practical feasibility support its use in dance performance screening and return-to-dance settings.

舞者敏捷性评估的信度和效度:六边形测试。
简介:敏捷性是舞蹈表演中一项基本的动作技能,能够根据舞蹈、音乐和环境的要求快速有效地改变方向。尽管它很重要,但没有标准化的,有效的基于场地的敏捷性测试专门为舞者建立。本研究旨在评估舞者八边形测验的重测信度、构念效度及判别效度。方法:本研究纳入32名训练有素的舞者(12名嘻哈舞者、10名芭蕾舞者和10名拉丁舞者),女性20人,男性12人,年龄23.0±3.9岁;42名久坐不动的个体(24名女性,18名男性,年龄22.9±2.9岁)。敏捷性评估采用六边形测试(以秒为单位)和Edgren侧步测试(ESST,以米为单位)。所有参与者在标准化条件下完成2次测试,间隔1周。采用类内相关系数(ICC)、测量标准误差(SEM)和最小可检测变化(MDC)分析重测信度。建构效度采用六边形检验与ESST之间的Pearson相关分析进行检验。采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析判别效度。结果:Hexagon检验具有良好的重测信度(ICC = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.93-0.97)。建构效度与ESST呈显著负相关(r = -0.72, P < .001)。ROC分析显示极好的判别效度,曲线下面积为0.91 (95% CI: 0.84-0.97),表明正确区分跳舞者和久坐者的概率为91%。结论:六边形测验是一种可靠、有效的实地评估舞者敏捷性的工具。其强大的心理测量特性和实际可行性支持其在舞蹈表演筛选和回归舞蹈设置中的应用。
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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
33
×
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
小红书