查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 第廿二屆臺灣區運動會韻律體操比賽裁判員評分一致性之探討=The Dicussion of Objective Consistency of the Judges Evaluating Competition of Rhythmic Sports Gymnastics Games in the 22nd Athletic Meet in the Taiwan Area |
---|---|
作者 | 顏智淵; | 書刊名 | 國立體育學院論叢 |
卷期 | 7:2 1997.04[民86.04] |
頁次 | 頁95-117 |
分類號 | 528.916 |
關鍵詞 | 臺灣區運動會; 韻律體操比賽; 裁判員; 評分; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本文研究之目的,乃在探討:第二十二屆臺灣區運動會韻律體操裁判員的評審分 數是否一致。本研究以中華民國八十四年於高雄市舉行的第二十二屆臺灣區運動會韻律體操 比賽 (繩、環、球、棍棒、彩帶 ),各單項進入前十名選手為研究對象; 以結構組裁判 (A 組 ) 與實施裁判其所評審之分數為研究資料。 本文將所獲得的資料, 以皮爾遜 (K.pearson) 積差相關法求結構組裁判、實施組裁判之評分相關性;再以相依樣本單因子變 異數分析 (ANOVA) 求各名裁判員之客觀一致性,如有差異, 以紐曼 -- 柯爾法 (N-K 法 ) 進行事後比較,經分析與討論後,獲得下列結論:一、結構組裁判員在評定「結構」時,其 相關達 P<.05~.01 的顯著水準。 而實施組裁判員在評定「實施」時," 環 "、" 球 "、及 " 彩帶 " 等項目,其裁判員給予選手的評審分數在統計學上則未達顯著水準 (P>.05)。 二 、經變異數分析結果得,實施組裁判之 " 球 " 項目 F=4.250 (P<.05) 具顯著性差異; 並 進行事後比較得知:裁判 4 與裁判 2, 及裁判 3 與裁判 4 的平均數之間有顯著性差異。 其餘結構組裁判及實施組裁判,其評分經變異數分析結果得 (P>.05),不具顯著差異,顯示 有一致性。 |
英文摘要 | The purpose of this article was to discuss if the grades for the Rhythmic Sports Gymnastics in the 22nd Athletic Meet in the Taiwan area were given objectively consistent. The research subjects were the first ten winners of every single item in the Rhythmic Sports Gymnastics of the 22nd Athletic Meet held in Kaohsiung in 1995. The research data were based on evaluated grades given by the structure Judges (Group A) and the Form Judges (Group B). In this article, I adopted the data obtained from the research to get the correlation between Group A and Group B judges with the help of K.Pearson's Product Moment Correlation. Then the objective consistency of judges in each group was obtained according to analysis of variance (ANOVA) . If the differences existed, comparing, analyzing, and discussing were done on the basis of Newman Keul's (N-K) method. The conclusions are as follows: (I) When Group A judges evaluted the structures, the correlation reached P<.05~.01, which showed manifest standard. However, while Group B judges evaluated forms, except for items such as "rings", "balls", and "colored ribbons" which reached the obvious standard, that is, P<.05~.01, the evaluated grades given to plays of other items such as "ropes" and "clubs", did not reach the distinct standard of P>.05 in statistics. (II) After the analysis of ANOVA, the evaluation made by Group B judges, evaluating the "ball" item F=4.250 (P<.05), showed marked differences. After comparison, it's known that the average of No.4 and No.2 judges was obviously different from that of No.3 and No.4 judges. The grades given by other judges in Group A and Group B did not show obvious differences. According to the analysis of ANOVA, the result was P>.05. Thus, the differences were not obvious; that is, the objective consistency was shown. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。