揭示运动队中的关系动态:社会关系模型入门》(Unraveling Relationship Dynamics in Sports Teams: a Primer on the Social Relations Model)。

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q2 HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM Psychology of Sport and Exercise Pub Date : 2024-09-27 DOI:10.1016/j.psychsport.2024.102752
Tom Loeys , Tom De Clerck , Leen Haerens
{"title":"揭示运动队中的关系动态:社会关系模型入门》(Unraveling Relationship Dynamics in Sports Teams: a Primer on the Social Relations Model)。","authors":"Tom Loeys ,&nbsp;Tom De Clerck ,&nbsp;Leen Haerens","doi":"10.1016/j.psychsport.2024.102752","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Interpersonal behavior in sports teams are inherently intricate. The Social Relations Model (SRM) presents a compelling framework to conceptualize and dissect these complexities, enabling the empirical testing of theories concerning relationships within group settings. The SRM decomposes dyadic measurements obtained from a round-robin design into components at the individual (actor and partner) level, relationship level, and team level. Leveraging data on need satisfaction, as experienced by the coach, team captain and two other athletes in relation to each other across 96 sports teams, we showcase the application of the SRM. A step-by-step introduction to the implementation of the model in R is provided. We elucidate how the SRM facilitates the investigation of research questions that deepen our understanding of team dynamics. Our illustration reveals that while the team effect exhibits minimal explanatory power over variability, substantial variability in need satisfaction is accounted for by both individual factors (actor and partner) and relationship effects. Notably, considerable differences are observed between sports teams in the extent to which coaches elicited need satisfaction in their team members. On average, coaches elicit lower levels of need satisfaction compared to other team members. Reciprocal relationships are evident in the team captain-athlete dyad and the athlete-athlete dyad, but not in dyadic relationships with the coach. In sum, this tutorial illustrates how analyzing dyadic data from a round-robin design using the SRM can enhance our understanding of dyadic relationship data within sports teams.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54536,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Sport and Exercise","volume":"76 ","pages":"Article 102752"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unraveling relationship dynamics in sports teams: A primer on the social relations model\",\"authors\":\"Tom Loeys ,&nbsp;Tom De Clerck ,&nbsp;Leen Haerens\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.psychsport.2024.102752\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Interpersonal behavior in sports teams are inherently intricate. The Social Relations Model (SRM) presents a compelling framework to conceptualize and dissect these complexities, enabling the empirical testing of theories concerning relationships within group settings. The SRM decomposes dyadic measurements obtained from a round-robin design into components at the individual (actor and partner) level, relationship level, and team level. Leveraging data on need satisfaction, as experienced by the coach, team captain and two other athletes in relation to each other across 96 sports teams, we showcase the application of the SRM. A step-by-step introduction to the implementation of the model in R is provided. We elucidate how the SRM facilitates the investigation of research questions that deepen our understanding of team dynamics. Our illustration reveals that while the team effect exhibits minimal explanatory power over variability, substantial variability in need satisfaction is accounted for by both individual factors (actor and partner) and relationship effects. Notably, considerable differences are observed between sports teams in the extent to which coaches elicited need satisfaction in their team members. On average, coaches elicit lower levels of need satisfaction compared to other team members. Reciprocal relationships are evident in the team captain-athlete dyad and the athlete-athlete dyad, but not in dyadic relationships with the coach. In sum, this tutorial illustrates how analyzing dyadic data from a round-robin design using the SRM can enhance our understanding of dyadic relationship data within sports teams.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54536,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology of Sport and Exercise\",\"volume\":\"76 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102752\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology of Sport and Exercise\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1469029224001638\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology of Sport and Exercise","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1469029224001638","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

体育团队中的人际行为本身就错综复杂。社会关系模型(SRM)提供了一个令人信服的框架,将这些复杂性概念化并加以剖析,从而能够对群体环境中的人际关系理论进行实证检验。社会关系模型将从循环设计中获得的二人测量数据分解为个人(参与者和伙伴)层面、关系层面和团队层面的组成部分。利用教练、队长和其他两名运动员在 96 支运动队中相互关系中体验到的需求满意度数据,我们展示了 SRM 的应用。我们将逐步介绍如何在 R 语言中实现该模型。我们阐明了 SRM 如何促进研究问题的调查,从而加深我们对团队动态的理解。我们的说明显示,虽然团队效应对变异性的解释力微乎其微,但个人因素(行为者和合作伙伴)和关系效应都能解释需求满意度的巨大变异性。值得注意的是,在教练激发队员需求满足的程度上,不同运动队之间存在很大差异。平均而言,教练激发的需求满足程度低于其他队员。队长与运动员之间以及运动员与运动员之间的互惠关系非常明显,但与教练之间的互惠关系却不明显。总之,本教程说明了使用 SRM 分析循环设计中的二元关系数据如何增强我们对运动队中二元关系数据的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Unraveling relationship dynamics in sports teams: A primer on the social relations model
Interpersonal behavior in sports teams are inherently intricate. The Social Relations Model (SRM) presents a compelling framework to conceptualize and dissect these complexities, enabling the empirical testing of theories concerning relationships within group settings. The SRM decomposes dyadic measurements obtained from a round-robin design into components at the individual (actor and partner) level, relationship level, and team level. Leveraging data on need satisfaction, as experienced by the coach, team captain and two other athletes in relation to each other across 96 sports teams, we showcase the application of the SRM. A step-by-step introduction to the implementation of the model in R is provided. We elucidate how the SRM facilitates the investigation of research questions that deepen our understanding of team dynamics. Our illustration reveals that while the team effect exhibits minimal explanatory power over variability, substantial variability in need satisfaction is accounted for by both individual factors (actor and partner) and relationship effects. Notably, considerable differences are observed between sports teams in the extent to which coaches elicited need satisfaction in their team members. On average, coaches elicit lower levels of need satisfaction compared to other team members. Reciprocal relationships are evident in the team captain-athlete dyad and the athlete-athlete dyad, but not in dyadic relationships with the coach. In sum, this tutorial illustrates how analyzing dyadic data from a round-robin design using the SRM can enhance our understanding of dyadic relationship data within sports teams.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
172
审稿时长
69 days
期刊介绍: Psychology of Sport and Exercise is an international forum for scholarly reports in the psychology of sport and exercise, broadly defined. The journal is open to the use of diverse methodological approaches. Manuscripts that will be considered for publication will present results from high quality empirical research, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, commentaries concerning already published PSE papers or topics of general interest for PSE readers, protocol papers for trials, and reports of professional practice (which will need to demonstrate academic rigour and go beyond mere description). The CONSORT guidelines consort-statement need to be followed for protocol papers for trials; authors should present a flow diagramme and attach with their cover letter the CONSORT checklist. For meta-analysis, the PRISMA prisma-statement guidelines should be followed; authors should present a flow diagramme and attach with their cover letter the PRISMA checklist. For systematic reviews it is recommended that the PRISMA guidelines are followed, although it is not compulsory. Authors interested in submitting replications of published studies need to contact the Editors-in-Chief before they start their replication. We are not interested in manuscripts that aim to test the psychometric properties of an existing scale from English to another language, unless new validation methods are used which address previously unanswered research questions.
期刊最新文献
Avoiding repetitive mistakes: Understanding post-error adjustment in response to head fake actions Within-person associations between daily stress and physical activity during working and non-working hours Behind the mask: Attentional focus and coping strategies of elite level fencers Expertise advantage of automatic prediction in visual motion representation is domain-general: A meta-analysis Do gender stereotype threats have a spillover effect on motor tasks among children? A mixed-model design investigation
×
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