USE OF OBJECTIVE METHODS TO DETERMINE THE HOLDING TIME OF HOLD ELEMENTS ON STILL RINGS

IF 0.6 Q4 SPORT SCIENCES Science of Gymnastics Journal Pub Date : 2021-06-25 DOI:10.52165/sgj.13.2.181-189
T. Lehmann, Alexander Winter, Alexander Seemann-Sinn, F. Naundorf
{"title":"USE OF OBJECTIVE METHODS TO DETERMINE THE HOLDING TIME OF HOLD ELEMENTS ON STILL RINGS","authors":"T. Lehmann, Alexander Winter, Alexander Seemann-Sinn, F. Naundorf","doi":"10.52165/sgj.13.2.181-189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The duration of holding elements represents a critical factor for judging routines on the still rings in artistic gymnastics. Athletes can be penalized with non-recognition of an element if the hold time is too short. Dynamometric and kinematic measuring methods offer the possibility to provide support to judges in evaluating the duration of the hold time. In this study a dynamometric method with two different variants (dms10 and dms5) as well as a kinematic method (kms) based on a trained neural network were presented and examined with regard to their agreement with judges’ evaluations when determining the hold time. To check the agreement, a) the percentage agreement and b) the interrater reliability were calculated using Cohen's kappa (k). The two dynamometric methods showed a percentage agreement of 83.5% (dms10) and 51.7% (dms5) with the hold time evaluation by judges. The percentage agreement of the kms was 38.8%. The interrater reliability showed for the dms10 a moderate (k = 0.58) and for the dms5 a fair (k = 0.23) agreement, while the kms showed a poor (k = 0.02) match. The results supported dms10 for its possible use as a practicable and reliable method to assist judges in evaluating hold times on the still rings. Dms5 and kms (in the current development stage) were not suitable as means of judges’ support.","PeriodicalId":44084,"journal":{"name":"Science of Gymnastics Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science of Gymnastics Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52165/sgj.13.2.181-189","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: 4

Abstract

The duration of holding elements represents a critical factor for judging routines on the still rings in artistic gymnastics. Athletes can be penalized with non-recognition of an element if the hold time is too short. Dynamometric and kinematic measuring methods offer the possibility to provide support to judges in evaluating the duration of the hold time. In this study a dynamometric method with two different variants (dms10 and dms5) as well as a kinematic method (kms) based on a trained neural network were presented and examined with regard to their agreement with judges’ evaluations when determining the hold time. To check the agreement, a) the percentage agreement and b) the interrater reliability were calculated using Cohen's kappa (k). The two dynamometric methods showed a percentage agreement of 83.5% (dms10) and 51.7% (dms5) with the hold time evaluation by judges. The percentage agreement of the kms was 38.8%. The interrater reliability showed for the dms10 a moderate (k = 0.58) and for the dms5 a fair (k = 0.23) agreement, while the kms showed a poor (k = 0.02) match. The results supported dms10 for its possible use as a practicable and reliable method to assist judges in evaluating hold times on the still rings. Dms5 and kms (in the current development stage) were not suitable as means of judges’ support.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用客观方法确定保持元件在静止环上的保持时间
在艺术体操静止环比赛中,抱环动作的持续时间是评判动作的关键因素。如果保持时间太短,运动员可能会被判不承认一个元素。动态测量和运动学测量方法为裁判评估保持时间的持续时间提供了支持。在本研究中,提出了具有两种不同变体(dms10和dms5)的动力学方法以及基于训练过的神经网络的运动学方法(km),并检查了它们在确定保持时间时与法官评估的一致性。为了检验一致性,采用Cohen’s kappa (k)计算a)一致性百分比和b)互判者信度。两种动态测量方法与法官保持时间评价的一致性百分比分别为83.5% (dms10)和51.7% (dms5)。km的满意率为38.8%。dms10和dms5的信度一致性为中等(k = 0.58)和一般(k = 0.23),而kms的信度一致性较差(k = 0.02)。结果支持dms10作为一种可行和可靠的方法来帮助裁判评估静止环的保持时间。Dms5和km(目前发展阶段)不适合作为法官支持的手段。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
33.30%
发文量
48
期刊最新文献
JUDGE BIAS IN AESTHETIC GROUP GYMNASTICS A Myriad of Problems with the Current Regulations for Artistic Gymnastics World Championships ANALYZING THE CONNECTION BETWEEN GYMNAST'S STATURE AND MEDAL PERFORMANCE ON APPARATUSES IN MEN'S ARTISTIC GYMNASTICS TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCES OF THE PALMS AFTER STATIC AND DYNAMIC LOAD IN SUPPORT ON PARALLEL BARS THE HISTORY OF GYMNASTICS IN THE TERRITORY OF SLOVAKIA FROM 1918 TO 1980
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1