审美团体体操中的裁判偏见

IF 0.6 Q4 SPORT SCIENCES
Seppo Suominen
{"title":"审美团体体操中的裁判偏见","authors":"Seppo Suominen","doi":"10.52165/sgj.15.3.441-452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are several competitions where the objectivity of judges has raised some questions, in particular the style point evaluation. If part of the actual performance can be objectively measured with an instrument and part of the performance is based on subjective evaluation of judges, an error in ranking is possible. There are some sport disciplines, like ski jumping, where both metrics are used (Krumer et al., 2020); however, in gymnastics, the only criteria are judges’ subjective evaluation (Bučar et al., 2012; Leskoŝek et al., 2012; Rotthoff, 2014). Our analysis reveals that biased judging in aesthetic group gymnastics is more than probable in domestic competitions in Finland. The local judge that evaluates their own team is not overestimating the performance in any of its three parts: technical value, artistic value, or execution value. However, it seems that judges strategically underestimate the performance of the most important rival. This underscoring is truncated since the highest and lowest scores are truncated in the case of four judges. The local judge’s scoring is usually within the two middle scores, which is taken into account in the final score of a performance. Our analysis used evaluations of 66 different competitions including 585 performances in a period of 22 months. All competitions were domestic, with domestic teams and domestic judges only. Many competitions had 12 judges: 4 evaluating technical value, 4 artistic value, and 4 execution value. All judges were nominated before the actual competition.","PeriodicalId":44084,"journal":{"name":"Science of Gymnastics Journal","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"JUDGE BIAS IN AESTHETIC GROUP GYMNASTICS\",\"authors\":\"Seppo Suominen\",\"doi\":\"10.52165/sgj.15.3.441-452\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There are several competitions where the objectivity of judges has raised some questions, in particular the style point evaluation. If part of the actual performance can be objectively measured with an instrument and part of the performance is based on subjective evaluation of judges, an error in ranking is possible. There are some sport disciplines, like ski jumping, where both metrics are used (Krumer et al., 2020); however, in gymnastics, the only criteria are judges’ subjective evaluation (Bučar et al., 2012; Leskoŝek et al., 2012; Rotthoff, 2014). Our analysis reveals that biased judging in aesthetic group gymnastics is more than probable in domestic competitions in Finland. The local judge that evaluates their own team is not overestimating the performance in any of its three parts: technical value, artistic value, or execution value. However, it seems that judges strategically underestimate the performance of the most important rival. This underscoring is truncated since the highest and lowest scores are truncated in the case of four judges. The local judge’s scoring is usually within the two middle scores, which is taken into account in the final score of a performance. Our analysis used evaluations of 66 different competitions including 585 performances in a period of 22 months. All competitions were domestic, with domestic teams and domestic judges only. Many competitions had 12 judges: 4 evaluating technical value, 4 artistic value, and 4 execution value. All judges were nominated before the actual competition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44084,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science of Gymnastics Journal\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science of Gymnastics Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52165/sgj.15.3.441-452\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science of Gymnastics Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52165/sgj.15.3.441-452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在一些比赛中,裁判的客观性提出了一些问题,特别是风格分的评价。如果用仪器可以客观地测量实际业绩的一部分,而部分业绩是基于裁判的主观评价,那么排名就有可能出现错误。有些体育项目,如跳台滑雪,使用了这两个指标(Krumer等人,2020);然而,在体操比赛中,唯一的评判标准是裁判的主观评价(bu等,2012;Leskoŝek等人,2012;Rotthoff, 2014)。分析表明,在芬兰国内比赛中,审美团体体操的裁判存在偏见的现象。当地评委在评估他们自己的队伍时,不会高估三个方面的表现:技术价值、艺术价值和执行价值。然而,评委们似乎在战略上低估了最重要的竞争对手的表现。这个下划线被截断,因为在四名裁判的情况下,最高和最低的分数被截断。当地裁判的评分通常在中间两分之内,在一场比赛的最终评分中会考虑到这两分。我们的分析使用了66项不同比赛的评估,包括22个月期间的585场比赛。所有的比赛都是国内的,只有国内的队伍和裁判。许多比赛有12名评委:4名评价技术价值,4名评价艺术价值,4名评价执行价值。所有的评委都是在正式比赛前被提名的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
JUDGE BIAS IN AESTHETIC GROUP GYMNASTICS
There are several competitions where the objectivity of judges has raised some questions, in particular the style point evaluation. If part of the actual performance can be objectively measured with an instrument and part of the performance is based on subjective evaluation of judges, an error in ranking is possible. There are some sport disciplines, like ski jumping, where both metrics are used (Krumer et al., 2020); however, in gymnastics, the only criteria are judges’ subjective evaluation (Bučar et al., 2012; Leskoŝek et al., 2012; Rotthoff, 2014). Our analysis reveals that biased judging in aesthetic group gymnastics is more than probable in domestic competitions in Finland. The local judge that evaluates their own team is not overestimating the performance in any of its three parts: technical value, artistic value, or execution value. However, it seems that judges strategically underestimate the performance of the most important rival. This underscoring is truncated since the highest and lowest scores are truncated in the case of four judges. The local judge’s scoring is usually within the two middle scores, which is taken into account in the final score of a performance. Our analysis used evaluations of 66 different competitions including 585 performances in a period of 22 months. All competitions were domestic, with domestic teams and domestic judges only. Many competitions had 12 judges: 4 evaluating technical value, 4 artistic value, and 4 execution value. All judges were nominated before the actual competition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
33.30%
发文量
48
×
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