大肌肉运动发展测验- 3效度与信度:筛选表

IF 0.8 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL Journal of Motor Learning and Development Pub Date : 2021-09-24 DOI:10.1123/jmld.2020-0061
N. Valentini, G. Nobre, Larissa Wagner Zanella, K. Pereira, M. Albuquerque, M. Rudisill
{"title":"大肌肉运动发展测验- 3效度与信度:筛选表","authors":"N. Valentini, G. Nobre, Larissa Wagner Zanella, K. Pereira, M. Albuquerque, M. Rudisill","doi":"10.1123/jmld.2020-0061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The Test of Gross Motor Development–3 (TGMD-3) is used to assess locomotor (LOCS) and ball (BS) skills in children. This test provides relevant information for evaluating learning and determining teaching efficacy. However, conducting and coding the test is time consuming. A screening form may improve its usage in specific settings and populations. Purpose: This study aimed to develop a screening form for the TGMD-3-SF and examine its validity and reliability. Method: We assessed 1,192 3-to-10-year-old children; 772 children completed the TGMD-3 and 420 the TGMD-3-SF; 114 children were retested for temporal stability and 300 for criterion validity. Results: We found appropriate results for the two-factors model, LOCS (gallop, hop, and skip) and BS (one-hand strike, kick, and overhand throw), RMSEA = .025, comparative-fit index = .99, and Tukey–Lewis index = .99; internal consistency (LOCS, α = .60; BS, α = .71); item validity (LOCS, r = .43, p < .001; BS, r = .47, p < .001); interrater (ICC = .86–.99), intrarater (ICC = .61–.92), test–retest (LOCS, ICC =.87; BS, ICC = .78) reliability, and concurrent validity (LOCS, r = .89, p < .01; BS, r = .90, p < .001). Conclusions: The TGMD-3-SF is valid and reliable for assessing children’s gross motor development.","PeriodicalId":37368,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Motor Learning and Development","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Test of Gross Motor Development–3 Validity and Reliability: A Screening Form\",\"authors\":\"N. Valentini, G. Nobre, Larissa Wagner Zanella, K. Pereira, M. Albuquerque, M. Rudisill\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/jmld.2020-0061\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The Test of Gross Motor Development–3 (TGMD-3) is used to assess locomotor (LOCS) and ball (BS) skills in children. This test provides relevant information for evaluating learning and determining teaching efficacy. However, conducting and coding the test is time consuming. A screening form may improve its usage in specific settings and populations. Purpose: This study aimed to develop a screening form for the TGMD-3-SF and examine its validity and reliability. Method: We assessed 1,192 3-to-10-year-old children; 772 children completed the TGMD-3 and 420 the TGMD-3-SF; 114 children were retested for temporal stability and 300 for criterion validity. Results: We found appropriate results for the two-factors model, LOCS (gallop, hop, and skip) and BS (one-hand strike, kick, and overhand throw), RMSEA = .025, comparative-fit index = .99, and Tukey–Lewis index = .99; internal consistency (LOCS, α = .60; BS, α = .71); item validity (LOCS, r = .43, p < .001; BS, r = .47, p < .001); interrater (ICC = .86–.99), intrarater (ICC = .61–.92), test–retest (LOCS, ICC =.87; BS, ICC = .78) reliability, and concurrent validity (LOCS, r = .89, p < .01; BS, r = .90, p < .001). Conclusions: The TGMD-3-SF is valid and reliable for assessing children’s gross motor development.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37368,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Motor Learning and Development\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Motor Learning and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmld.2020-0061\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Motor Learning and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmld.2020-0061","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: 3

摘要

背景:大肌肉运动发展测试-3 (TGMD-3)用于评估儿童的运动(LOCS)和球(BS)技能。该测试为评价学习和确定教学效果提供了相关信息。然而,执行和编码测试是非常耗时的。一种筛查形式可以提高其在特定环境和人群中的使用率。目的:本研究旨在建立TGMD-3-SF的筛选表,并检验其效度和信度。方法:我们评估了1,192名3- 10岁儿童;772名儿童完成TGMD-3, 420名儿童完成TGMD-3- sf;114名儿童重测时间稳定性,300名重测标准效度。结果:我们找到了适合的双因素模型,LOCS(飞奔、跳跃和跳跃)和BS(单手打击、踢腿和上手投掷),RMSEA =。[25]比较拟合指数=。99, Tukey-Lewis指数= .99;内部一致性(los, α = 0.60;b, α = 0.71);项目效度(LOCS, r =。43, p < .001;b, r =。47, p < .001);inter - ater (ICC = 0.86 - 0.99), intrarater (ICC = 0.61 - 0.92), test-retest (LOCS, ICC = 0.87;BS, ICC = .78)信度,同时效度(LOCS, r =。89, p < 0.01;b, r =。90, p < 0.001)。结论:TGMD-3-SF量表用于评估儿童大动作发展是有效可靠的。
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
Test of Gross Motor Development–3 Validity and Reliability: A Screening Form
Background: The Test of Gross Motor Development–3 (TGMD-3) is used to assess locomotor (LOCS) and ball (BS) skills in children. This test provides relevant information for evaluating learning and determining teaching efficacy. However, conducting and coding the test is time consuming. A screening form may improve its usage in specific settings and populations. Purpose: This study aimed to develop a screening form for the TGMD-3-SF and examine its validity and reliability. Method: We assessed 1,192 3-to-10-year-old children; 772 children completed the TGMD-3 and 420 the TGMD-3-SF; 114 children were retested for temporal stability and 300 for criterion validity. Results: We found appropriate results for the two-factors model, LOCS (gallop, hop, and skip) and BS (one-hand strike, kick, and overhand throw), RMSEA = .025, comparative-fit index = .99, and Tukey–Lewis index = .99; internal consistency (LOCS, α = .60; BS, α = .71); item validity (LOCS, r = .43, p < .001; BS, r = .47, p < .001); interrater (ICC = .86–.99), intrarater (ICC = .61–.92), test–retest (LOCS, ICC =.87; BS, ICC = .78) reliability, and concurrent validity (LOCS, r = .89, p < .01; BS, r = .90, p < .001). Conclusions: The TGMD-3-SF is valid and reliable for assessing children’s gross motor development.
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
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