运动员临场应对能力的结构模式构建及检验
|
摘要
研究通过对200名运动员进行问卷调查,在对《运动员临场应对能力测评工具》进行修正的基础上,进一步对运动员临场应对能力的内部结构模式进行了构建与检验。结果显示:(1)由于量表中T20题项信度偏低(Imax≤0. 2),本研究对其进行了剔除;(2)在量表的信、效度检验中,量表的科隆巴赫α系数=0. 801(行为应对:0. 784,认知应对:0. 705、情绪应对:0. 628)、构想效度(维度之间的相关系数r=0. 509～0. 654普遍小于维度与总量表之间的相关系数r=0. 664～0. 723)以及结构效度(χ2/df=1. 921、GFI指标=0. 902、CFI=0. 912等)均符合拟合标准;(3)通过对不同运动水平运动员的临场应对能力结构模式分析,发现认知应对→行为应对→情绪应对→认知应对的路径系数均较高(> 0. 50),仅出现情绪应对→行为应对路径系数偏低(0. 398)。研究认为:运动员临场应对能力结构模式存在一种闭合的循环链式路径(即认知应对→行为应对→情绪应对→认知应对)。且二级运动员应该首先对行为应对→情绪应对和情绪应对→认知应对进行训练,而一级运动员则首选对情绪应对→认知应对进行训练。
Through a questionnaire survey of 200 athletes and on the basis of the revision of the assessment tools for the athletes' coping ability,the paper further constructs and tests the internal structure model of the athletes' coping ability. The results show that:( 1) Because of the low reliability of item T20 in the scale( Imax < 0. 2),it was eliminated.( 2) In the test of reliability and validity,the Cologne Bach alpha coefficient = 0. 801( behavior response: 0. 784,cognitive coping: 0. 705,emotional response: 0. 628),conceptual validity( the correlation coefficient between dimensions r = 0. 509 ～ 0. 654 is generally less than the correlation coefficient between dimension and total table r = 0. 664 ～ 0. 723.) and the structural validity( χ2/df = 1. 921、GFI = 0. 902、CFI = 0. 912) conform to the fitting standard.( 3) Through the analysis of the coping ability structure model of athletes with different sports level,it was found that the path coefficients of cognitive coping → behavioral coping→ emotional coping → cognitive coping were higher( > 0. 50),but only the coefficient of emotional coping →behavior coping path was low( 0. 398). The research holds that there is a closed cycle chain path( cognitive coping → behavioral coping → emotional coping → cognitive coping) in the pattern of coping ability structure of athletes. And the two level athletes should first train the behavior coping → emotional coping and emotional coping → cognitive coping,while the first class athletes are the first to train emotional coping → cognitive coping.
Through a questionnaire survey of 200 athletes and on the basis of the revision of the assessment tools for the athletes' coping ability,the paper further constructs and tests the internal structure model of the athletes' coping ability. The results show that:( 1) Because of the low reliability of item T20 in the scale( Imax < 0. 2),it was eliminated.( 2) In the test of reliability and validity,the Cologne Bach alpha coefficient = 0. 801( behavior response: 0. 784,cognitive coping: 0. 705,emotional response: 0. 628),conceptual validity( the correlation coefficient between dimensions r = 0. 509 ～ 0. 654 is generally less than the correlation coefficient between dimension and total table r = 0. 664 ～ 0. 723.) and the structural validity( χ2/df = 1. 921、GFI = 0. 902、CFI = 0. 912) conform to the fitting standard.( 3) Through the analysis of the coping ability structure model of athletes with different sports level,it was found that the path coefficients of cognitive coping → behavioral coping→ emotional coping → cognitive coping were higher( > 0. 50),but only the coefficient of emotional coping →behavior coping path was low( 0. 398). The research holds that there is a closed cycle chain path( cognitive coping → behavioral coping → emotional coping → cognitive coping) in the pattern of coping ability structure of athletes. And the two level athletes should first train the behavior coping → emotional coping and emotional coping → cognitive coping,while the first class athletes are the first to train emotional coping → cognitive coping.
引文
[1]董德朋,岳晓燕,刘巍,等.我国专业运动员赛时自我调控测量工具的研制与检验[J].体育科学,2013,33(12):49-58.
[2] Anshel M H,Kim K W,Kim B H,et al. A model for coping with stressful events in sport:theory,application,and future directions.International Journal of Sport Psychology. 2001,32(1):43-75.
[3]梁宝勇.应对研究的成果、问题与解决办法.心理学报,2002,34(6),643–650.
[4]王学敏.运动员临场应对能力测评工具的编制与检验[J]. 2017,42(6):129-135.
[5]董德朋,刘巍,孙世超. CTT、IRT、FT:体育科学量表编制中的应用——以《特质流程量表》为研究例证.体育科学,2015,35(9):75-83.
[6]董德朋.我国男子自由跤运动员力量训练中的几种关系探究[D].长春:吉林大学,2016:1-42.
[7]黄希庭,凤四海,王卫红.青少年学生自我价值感全国常模的制定.心理科学,2003,26(2),194–198.
[8]董德龙,杨斌.中国运动训练学需面对的3个问题:学科内容、研究范式与知识构建[J].北京体育大学学报,2015,38(3):126-131.
[9]董德龙.校企合作下的体育社会服务方式与风险控制研究[M].北京:人民体育出版社,2015.
[10]董德朋,袁雷,韩义.基于Arc GIS的城市中心城区公共体育服务空间:结构、问题与策略——以长春市为例[J].上海体育学院学报,2017,41(6):10-16.
[11]胡志.提高运动员应对能力的实验研究.中国体育科技. 2005,41(5):132-135.
[2] Anshel M H,Kim K W,Kim B H,et al. A model for coping with stressful events in sport:theory,application,and future directions.International Journal of Sport Psychology. 2001,32(1):43-75.
[3]梁宝勇.应对研究的成果、问题与解决办法.心理学报,2002,34(6),643–650.
[4]王学敏.运动员临场应对能力测评工具的编制与检验[J]. 2017,42(6):129-135.
[5]董德朋,刘巍,孙世超. CTT、IRT、FT:体育科学量表编制中的应用——以《特质流程量表》为研究例证.体育科学,2015,35(9):75-83.
[6]董德朋.我国男子自由跤运动员力量训练中的几种关系探究[D].长春:吉林大学,2016:1-42.
[7]黄希庭,凤四海,王卫红.青少年学生自我价值感全国常模的制定.心理科学,2003,26(2),194–198.
[8]董德龙,杨斌.中国运动训练学需面对的3个问题:学科内容、研究范式与知识构建[J].北京体育大学学报,2015,38(3):126-131.
[9]董德龙.校企合作下的体育社会服务方式与风险控制研究[M].北京:人民体育出版社,2015.
[10]董德朋,袁雷,韩义.基于Arc GIS的城市中心城区公共体育服务空间:结构、问题与策略——以长春市为例[J].上海体育学院学报,2017,41(6):10-16.
[11]胡志.提高运动员应对能力的实验研究.中国体育科技. 2005,41(5):132-135.