دانلود مقاله ISI انگلیسی شماره 37304
عنوان فارسی مقاله

اثرات شرایط و فردی بر رفتار ضد اجتماعی و حاالات اجتماعی زیستی روانی بازیکنان فوتبال جوانان

کد مقاله سال انتشار مقاله انگلیسی ترجمه فارسی تعداد کلمات
37304 2012 10 صفحه PDF سفارش دهید محاسبه نشده
خرید مقاله
پس از پرداخت، فوراً می توانید مقاله را دانلود فرمایید.
عنوان انگلیسی
Contextual and individual influences on antisocial behaviour and psychobiosocial states of youth soccer players
منبع

Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)

Journal : Psychology of Sport and Exercise, Volume 13, Issue 4, July 2012, Pages 397–406

کلمات کلیدی
هدف دستیابی به تئوری - فضای اخلاقی - ادراک صلاحیت ورزشی - مدل
پیش نمایش مقاله
پیش نمایش مقاله اثرات شرایط و فردی بر رفتار ضد اجتماعی و حاالات اجتماعی زیستی روانی بازیکنان فوتبال جوانان

چکیده انگلیسی

Abstract Purpose The aim of the study was to assess the effects of contextual and individual variables (perceived motivational climate and moral atmosphere, task/ego orientation and perceived competence) on antisocial behaviour and emotion-related psychobiosocial (PBS) states as conceptualised within the individual zones of optimal functioning model. Participants The study was conducted on a sample of 382 young male soccer players, aged from 14 to 16 years, drawn from 27 Italian teams.

نتیجه گیری انگلیسی

Results Descriptive statistics of the measures Descriptive statistics, internal consistency coefficients (i.e., Cronbach α values), and Pearson product–moment correlations of final measures are reported in Table 1. The inspection of mean scores revealed that, in general, participants engaged in unsportsperson-like behaviours infrequently, they were more task-oriented than ego-oriented and perceived themselves to be competent in sport. Further, participants perceived their motivational climate as mastery rather than performance-involving, and their coach as not encouraging antisocial behaviour. They also reported higher levels of pleasant than unpleasant PBS states associated with their sporting experience. Table 1. Descriptive statistics, Cronbach α values, and Pearson product–moment correlations of measures. M SD Score ranges α 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. Antisocial behaviour 2.10 .95 1–5 .70 – 2. Moral atmosphere 2.11 .93 1–5 .71 .41** – 3. Mastery climate 4.02 .71 1–5 .80 −.17** −.21** – 4. Performance climate 2.45 .74 1–5 .70 .11* .17** −.36** – 5. Task orientation 4.06 .60 1–5 .82 −.09 −.05 .32** −.04 – 6. Ego orientation 2.99 .84 1–5 .85 .11* .18** −.08 .18** .23** – 7. Perceived sports competence 4.41 .85 1–6 .83 .08 .09 .08 .03 .32** .27** – 8. Pleasant PBS states 2.62 .65 0–4 .80 .08 .00 .24** −.02 .51** .22** .42** – 9. Unpleasant PBS states .63 .51 0–3 .70 .11* .12** −.24** .20** −.18** .01 −.21** −.34** Note: *p < .05; **p < .01. Table options Factorial validity of the measures The antisocial behaviour and moral atmosphere measures, the PMCSQ, the TEOSQ, and the PBS questionnaire included two scales each. When the hypothesized two-factor structure of a questionnaire had a poor fit, inspection of the Lagrange modification indices suggested model modification with the addition of freely estimated parameters to improve the model fit. We allowed the errors of the first and the third items of the antisocial behaviour scale to covary with the respective items of the moral atmosphere scale because the same dilemmas were used to assess different constructs (i.e., antisocial behaviour and moral atmosphere). Furthermore, the errors of two items of the mastery subscale of the PMCSQ (i.e., “On this team, participants are encouraged to work on their weaknesses” and “On this team, the coach makes sure participants improve on skills they're not good at”) were left to covary because of the obvious overlap of item contents. Indeed, these items appear to convey the same idea, albeit the wording is slightly different. For the same reason, the error term pairing procedure was adopted for two items of the performance subscale of the PMCSQ (i.e., “On this team, the coach has his/her own favourites” and “On this team, the coach favours some participants more than others”), two items of the ego subscale of the TEOSQ (i.e., “I score the most goals” and “I'm the best”) and two items of the task subscale (i.e., “I learn a new skill by trying hard” and “I work really hard”), two items of the pleasant subscale of the PBS descriptors (i.e., “convinced, resolute, purposeful” and “involved, determined, committed”) and two items of the unpleasant subscale (i.e., “inactive, sluggish, passive” and “unmotivated, disengaged”). Table 2 contains the goodness-of-fit indices related to the questionnaires and the fit indices of the scales improved after model modification. As can be seen, the fit indices of the final scales were substantially improved (Δχ2 all significant). Table 2. Goodness-of-fit indices of the measures. Measures χ2(df) χ2/df Δχ2(2) GFI CFI RMR RMSEA Antisocial behaviour and moral atmosphere 75.139 (8) 9.392 .941 .881 .089 .148 (.119–.180) Improved 5.622 (6) .937 69.517 .995 1.000 .032 .000 (.000–.064) PMCSQ 186.481 (53) 3.519 .920 .898 .075 .081 (.069–.094) Improved 134.707 (51) 2.641 51.774 .952 .948 .060 .060 (.046–.074) TEOSQ 331.596 (64) 5.181 .880 .852 .086 .105 (.094–.116) Improved 270.127 (62) 4.357 61.469 .960 .974 .041 .047 (.033–.061) Perceived sports competence 15.709 (9) 1.745 .986 .991 .036 .044 (.000–.080) PBS states 285.338 (76) 3.754 .907 .835 .052 .085 (.075–.096) Improved 218.858 (74) 2.958 66.480 .952 .943 .040 .052 (.040–.064) Note: GFI = goodness-of-fit index, CFI = comparative fit index, RMR = root mean square residual, RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation (and lower and higher boundary of a 90% confidence interval). All Δχ2(2), p < .0001. Table options Path analysis The measures correlated with each other as expected (see Table 1). Higher correlation values were shown between antisocial behaviour and moral atmosphere, mastery and performance climate (negative relationship), task orientation and pleasant PBS states, and perceived sports competence and pleasant PBS states. It is also worth noting that, as hypothesized, moral atmosphere correlated positively with performance climate and negatively with mastery climate, and that both moral atmosphere and performance climate related positively to unpleasant PBS states. Furthermore, task and ego orientation correlated positively with perceived sports competence, and pleasant PBS states correlated negatively with unpleasant PBS states. Path analysis showed that the hypothesized model depicted in Fig. 1 fitted the data well, χ2(16) = 48.733, χ2/df = 3.046, GFI = .982, CFI = .966; RMR = .038, RMSEA = .039 (.000–.068). Most of the hypothesized relationships were significant (p < .05) with the exception of seven paths: mastery climate to antisocial behaviour, performance climate to antisocial behaviour, mastery climate to pleasant PBS states, ego orientation to antisocial behaviour, ego orientation to pleasant PBS states, perceived sports competence to antisocial behaviour, and antisocial behaviour to unpleasant PBS states. The model explained 34.0% of the variance in pleasant PBS states, 11.0% in unpleasant PBS states, and 10.7% in antisocial behaviour. Fig. 2 illustrates the standardized paths in the model. Standardized parameter values of the path model (*p < .05; **p < .01). Fig. 2. Standardized parameter values of the path model (*p < .05; **p < .01). Figure options Mediation analyses were then conducted to examine specific hypotheses of the study. In contrast to our hypothesis, ego orientation did not mediate the link between moral atmosphere and antisocial behaviour. Indeed, the overall mediation effect suggested no mediation, Sobel test z = .85, p > .05, bootstrap test 95% CI (indirect effect) = −.009–.028, and abcs = .008. Together, ego orientation and moral atmosphere explained 16.7% of the variability in antisocial behaviour, with only moral atmosphere making a significant contribution, β = .40, t(381) = 8.38, p < .001. Also perceived sports competence did not mediate the link between ego orientation and antisocial behaviour. In fact, the relation of perceived sports competence to antisocial behaviour was not significant, thereby precluding further analysis. This finding is contrary to what was expected. The direct effect of mastery climate on pleasant PBS states was not significant when task orientation was taken into account, β = .08, t(381) = 1.89, p > .05. As expected, this relationship was fully mediated by task orientation that had positive effects on pleasant PBS states. Specifically, the mediation of task orientation yielded significant findings, z = 5.47, p < .01, bootstrap test 95% CI (indirect effect) = .095–.215, and abcs = .151. Task orientation uniquely explained 25.5% of the variability in pleasant states. Regarding perceived sports competence, it was not significantly related to mastery climate, thus precluding additional mediation analysis. Therefore, perceived sports competence did not moderate the effect of mastery climate on pleasant PBS states. Finally, as hypothesized the relation of ego orientation to pleasant PBS states was fully mediated by perceived sports competence, z = 4.52, p < .01, bootstrap test 95% CI (indirect effect) = .060–.152, and abcs = .106. Indeed, when perceived sports competence was taken into account, the link between ego orientation and pleasant PBS states was not significant, β = .07, t(381) = 1.78, p > .05. Perceived sports competence uniquely explained 17.7% of the variability in pleasant states.

خرید مقاله
پس از پرداخت، فوراً می توانید مقاله را دانلود فرمایید.