Interrater Reliability of the Test of Gross Motor Development—Third Edition Following Raters’ Agreement on Measurement Criteria

IF 0.8 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL Journal of Motor Learning and Development Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1123/jmld.2022-0068
Aida Carballo-Fazanes, E. Rey, N. Valentini, Cristina Varela-Casal, C. Abelairas‐Gómez
{"title":"Interrater Reliability of the Test of Gross Motor Development—Third Edition Following Raters’ Agreement on Measurement Criteria","authors":"Aida Carballo-Fazanes, E. Rey, N. Valentini, Cristina Varela-Casal, C. Abelairas‐Gómez","doi":"10.1123/jmld.2022-0068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We aimed to calculate interrater reliability of the Test of Gross Motor Development—Third Edition (TGMD-3) after raters reached a consensus regarding measurement criteria. Three raters measured the fundamental movement skills of 25 children on the TGMD-3 at two different times: (a) once when simply following the measurement criteria in the TGMD-3 manual and (b) after a 9-month washout period, following the raters’ consensus building for the measurement criteria for each skill. After calculating and comparing the interrater reliability of these three raters across these two rating times, we found improved interrater reliability after the raters’ consensus-building discussions on ratings of both locomotor skills (moderate-to-good reliability on two of six skills initially and at least moderate-to-excellent on four of six skills following criteria consensus building) and ball skills (moderate-to-good reliability on one of seven skills initially and at least moderate-to-excellent reliability on four of seven skills following criteria consensus building). For subtest scores and overall test scores, raters achieved at least moderate-to-good reliability on their second, postconsensus-building ratings. Based on this improved reliability following consensus building, we recommend that researchers include rater consensus building before assessing children’s fundamental movement skills or guiding curriculum interventions in physical education from TGMD-3 data.","PeriodicalId":37368,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Motor Learning and Development","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Motor Learning and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmld.2022-0068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We aimed to calculate interrater reliability of the Test of Gross Motor Development—Third Edition (TGMD-3) after raters reached a consensus regarding measurement criteria. Three raters measured the fundamental movement skills of 25 children on the TGMD-3 at two different times: (a) once when simply following the measurement criteria in the TGMD-3 manual and (b) after a 9-month washout period, following the raters’ consensus building for the measurement criteria for each skill. After calculating and comparing the interrater reliability of these three raters across these two rating times, we found improved interrater reliability after the raters’ consensus-building discussions on ratings of both locomotor skills (moderate-to-good reliability on two of six skills initially and at least moderate-to-excellent on four of six skills following criteria consensus building) and ball skills (moderate-to-good reliability on one of seven skills initially and at least moderate-to-excellent reliability on four of seven skills following criteria consensus building). For subtest scores and overall test scores, raters achieved at least moderate-to-good reliability on their second, postconsensus-building ratings. Based on this improved reliability following consensus building, we recommend that researchers include rater consensus building before assessing children’s fundamental movement skills or guiding curriculum interventions in physical education from TGMD-3 data.
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
大肌肉运动发展测验的互估者信度-第三版:根据评分者对测量标准的一致意见
我们的目的是在评分者就测量标准达成共识后,计算大肌肉动作发展测试第三版(TGMD-3)的相互信度。三名评分者在两个不同的时间测量了25名儿童在TGMD-3上的基本运动技能:(a)一次,简单地遵循TGMD-3手册中的测量标准;(b)在9个月的冲洗期之后,遵循评分者对每个技能的测量标准的共识。在计算和比较了这三个评价者在这两个评价期的互估信度后,我们发现,在评判员对运动技能(最初六项技能中的两项具有中等到良好的可靠性,在标准共识建立之后,六项技能中的四项具有至少中等到优秀的可靠性)和球类技能(最初七项技能中的一项具有中等到良好的可靠性,在标准共识建立之后,七项技能中的四项具有至少中等到优秀的可靠性)的评级进行讨论后,评判员的信度得到了改善。对于子测试分数和总体测试分数,评分者在他们的第二次,即建立共识后的评分中至少达到了中等到良好的可靠性。基于共识构建后可靠性的提高,我们建议研究人员在评估儿童基本运动技能或根据TGMD-3数据指导体育课程干预之前,包括更多的共识构建。
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
Journal of Motor Learning and Development
Journal of Motor Learning and Development Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
15.40%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: The Journal of Motor Learning and Development (JMLD) publishes peer-reviewed research that advances the understanding of movement skill acquisition and expression across the lifespan. JMLD aims to provide a platform for theoretical, translational, applied, and innovative research related to factors that influence the learning or re-learning of skills in individuals with various movement-relevant abilities and disabilities.
期刊最新文献
Virtual Motivation: The Psychological and Transfer of Learning Effects of Immersive Virtual Reality Practice A Single Session of Mindfulness Meditation Expedites Immediate Motor Memory Consolidation to Improve Wakeful Offline Learning The Effect of Part and Whole Practice on Learning Lay-Up Shot Skill in Young and Adolescent Male Students Does Sedentary Behavior Predict Motor Competence in Young Children? The Path to Translating Focus of Attention Research into Canadian Physiotherapy, Part 2: Physiotherapist Interviews Reveal Impacting Factors and Barriers to Focus of Attention Use
×
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