Reliability and agreement in technical and artistic scores during real-time judging in two European acrobatic gymnastic events

IF 2.1 4区 教育学 Q1 Health Professions
J. A. León-Prados, M. Jemni
{"title":"Reliability and agreement in technical and artistic scores during real-time judging in two European acrobatic gymnastic events","authors":"J. A. León-Prados, M. Jemni","doi":"10.1080/24748668.2021.1996913","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The study investigates reliability measures for performance scores given by random judges (Execution and Artistic scores) and the agreement between more expert judges (Control Scores) and the two middle Execution/Artistic scores (Panel scores) during Qualifying and Final competitions performed at the 10th European Age Group Competition (EAGC) and at the 29th European Acrobatic Gymnastics Championships (ECh). To assess agreement, mean absolute Control-Panel score deviations were calculated using Bland-Altman and Kaplan-Meier plots. Reliability average measures ranged from 0.88 to 0.97. Control Score reliability was higher in ECh for Execution and Artistic scores. Artistic scores showed higher variability and lower agreement between judges in Qualification for ECh. Significant differences were found in Control and Panel score mean deviations for Execution scores at the EAGC and for Artistic scores at the ECh. No significant reliability differences were found between competitions. Control-and-Panel score correlations ranged from 0.862 to 0.915 for Execution scores and from 0.864 to 0.899 for Artistic scores. Overall results exceeded 80% agreement for Execution and Artistic scores. Reliability and strength of agreement of judging were high and very acceptable respectively. We suggest that judging reliability should be regularly examined to optimise technical and artistic criteria set by FIG for fairer competition.","PeriodicalId":49049,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport","volume":"22 1","pages":"132 - 148"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2021.1996913","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT The study investigates reliability measures for performance scores given by random judges (Execution and Artistic scores) and the agreement between more expert judges (Control Scores) and the two middle Execution/Artistic scores (Panel scores) during Qualifying and Final competitions performed at the 10th European Age Group Competition (EAGC) and at the 29th European Acrobatic Gymnastics Championships (ECh). To assess agreement, mean absolute Control-Panel score deviations were calculated using Bland-Altman and Kaplan-Meier plots. Reliability average measures ranged from 0.88 to 0.97. Control Score reliability was higher in ECh for Execution and Artistic scores. Artistic scores showed higher variability and lower agreement between judges in Qualification for ECh. Significant differences were found in Control and Panel score mean deviations for Execution scores at the EAGC and for Artistic scores at the ECh. No significant reliability differences were found between competitions. Control-and-Panel score correlations ranged from 0.862 to 0.915 for Execution scores and from 0.864 to 0.899 for Artistic scores. Overall results exceeded 80% agreement for Execution and Artistic scores. Reliability and strength of agreement of judging were high and very acceptable respectively. We suggest that judging reliability should be regularly examined to optimise technical and artistic criteria set by FIG for fairer competition.
两个欧洲杂技项目实时评判技术和艺术得分的可靠性和一致性
摘要:本研究调查了在第10届欧洲年龄组比赛(EAGC)和第29届欧洲杂技体操锦标赛(ECh)的资格赛和决赛中,随机评委给出的表演分数(执行和艺术分数)和更多专家评委(控制分数)与两个中间执行/艺术分数(小组分数)之间的一致性。为了评估一致性,使用Bland-Altman和Kaplan-Meier图计算平均绝对控制面板评分偏差。可靠性的平均测量范围从0.88到0.97。控制分数的信度较高的ECh执行和艺术得分。艺术成绩表现出较高的差异性和较低的一致性。在EAGC的执行分数和ECh的艺术分数的控制和小组得分的平均偏差上发现了显著差异。竞赛间的信度无显著差异。控制-面板得分相关性范围为执行得分0.862 - 0.915,艺术得分0.864 - 0.899。总体结果在执行和艺术得分上的一致性超过80%。判断的可靠性和一致性强度分别较高和非常可接受。我们建议应该定期检查裁判的可靠性,以优化FIG制定的技术和艺术标准,以实现更公平的竞争。
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
4.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
38
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport aims to present current original research into sports performance. In so doing, the journal contributes to our general knowledge of sports performance making findings available to a wide audience of academics and practitioners.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信