2003 Fiscal Year Final Research Report Summary
The content validity on artistic gymnastics judging
| Project/Area Number |
14580045
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
体育学
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Kagoshima University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
TAKAOKA Osamu Kagoshima University, Faculty of Educaton, Associate Professor, 教育学部, 助教授 (80206713)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2002 – 2003
|
| Keywords | Artstics Gymnastics / Judging Method / Eye Mark / Content Validity |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
The first actual code of Points of the Federation Internationale de Gymnastique[F.l.G.]was formulated in the year 1949.The purpose of code of Points was ensuring the objective evaluation of gymnastic performances.Code of Points was repeated reversions in the past 50 years with technical progress in the artistic gymnastics.Since 1949, Code of Points included the evaluation factors of exercise presentation[execution], difficulty, special requirements[combination].Additionally in 1975, bonus points were incorporated as an evaluation.F.I.G.required each of judges concurrently to assign numerical ratings for each of those categories[Combine Method].In 1997, An A-and B-judge with separated tasks[Separated Method], A-judge was evaluation of difficulty, special requirements and bonus points, B-judge was evaluation of exercise presentation, was introduced.
The purpose of this investigation was to determine the effects of the number of behavior categories systematically observed on the reliability and validity of judges' ratings.Subjects were 24 certified male gymnastics judges.Subjects rated 16 routines under standardized conditions with representing two gymnastic judging methods.The internal consistency of individual judges' ratings for both judging methods were determined by Cronbach's α.The internal consistency for both judging methods indicated height level consistency.The results of the analysis of variance on the start value indicated that no significant difference between judging method.However, the analysis of variance on the deductions of exercise presentation was significant.Inspection of the means showed that Combine Method had less deductions than Separated Method.In addition, the analysis of variance on the final score was also significant.Inspection of the means showed that Separated Method had less final score than combine Method.There were suggested that need to bring up the judge's ability to evaluate the exercise presentation.
|
