File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Assumptions in research in sport and exercise psychology

TitleAssumptions in research in sport and exercise psychology
Authors
Issue Date2009
PublisherElsevier BV. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/psychsport
Citation
Psychology Of Sport And Exercise, 2009, v. 10 n. 5, p. 511-519 How to Cite?
AbstractObjectives: The aim of this article is to outline how certain key assumptions affect the quality and interpretation of research in quantitative sport and exercise psychology. Methods: A review of three common assumptions made in the sport and exercise psychology literature was conducted. The review focused on three assumptions relating to research validity and the treatment and interpretation of observations. A central theme to this discussion is the assumption that research observations reflect true effects in a population. Results: Assumptions often made in sport and exercise psychology research were identified in three key areas: (1) validity, (2) inferences of causality, and (3) effect size and the "practical significance" of research findings. Findings indicated that many studies made assumptions about the validity of the self-report psychological measures adopted and few provided a comprehensive evaluation of the validity of these measures. Researchers adopting correlational designs in sport and exercise psychology often infer causality despite such conclusions being based on theory or speculation rather than empirical evidence. Research reports still do not include effect size statistics as standard and confine the discussion of findings to statistical significance alone rather than commenting on "practical significance". Conclusion: Research quality can only be evaluated with due consideration of the common assumptions that limits empirical investigation in sport and exercise psychology. We offer some practical advice for researchers, reviewers, and journal editors to minimise the impact of these assumptions and enhance the quality of research findings in sport and exercise psychology. © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/161351
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.605
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.303
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHagger, MSen_US
dc.contributor.authorChatzisarantis, NLDen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-24T08:30:49Z-
dc.date.available2012-08-24T08:30:49Z-
dc.date.issued2009en_US
dc.identifier.citationPsychology Of Sport And Exercise, 2009, v. 10 n. 5, p. 511-519en_US
dc.identifier.issn1469-0292en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/161351-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: The aim of this article is to outline how certain key assumptions affect the quality and interpretation of research in quantitative sport and exercise psychology. Methods: A review of three common assumptions made in the sport and exercise psychology literature was conducted. The review focused on three assumptions relating to research validity and the treatment and interpretation of observations. A central theme to this discussion is the assumption that research observations reflect true effects in a population. Results: Assumptions often made in sport and exercise psychology research were identified in three key areas: (1) validity, (2) inferences of causality, and (3) effect size and the "practical significance" of research findings. Findings indicated that many studies made assumptions about the validity of the self-report psychological measures adopted and few provided a comprehensive evaluation of the validity of these measures. Researchers adopting correlational designs in sport and exercise psychology often infer causality despite such conclusions being based on theory or speculation rather than empirical evidence. Research reports still do not include effect size statistics as standard and confine the discussion of findings to statistical significance alone rather than commenting on "practical significance". Conclusion: Research quality can only be evaluated with due consideration of the common assumptions that limits empirical investigation in sport and exercise psychology. We offer some practical advice for researchers, reviewers, and journal editors to minimise the impact of these assumptions and enhance the quality of research findings in sport and exercise psychology. © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherElsevier BV. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/psychsporten_US
dc.relation.ispartofPsychology of Sport and Exerciseen_US
dc.titleAssumptions in research in sport and exercise psychologyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailHagger, MS:martin.hagger@nottingham.ac.uken_US
dc.identifier.authorityHagger, MS=rp01644en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.01.004en_US
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-67649870063en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-67649870063&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume10en_US
dc.identifier.issue5en_US
dc.identifier.spage511en_US
dc.identifier.epage519en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000268564600005-
dc.publisher.placeNetherlandsen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHagger, MS=6602134841en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChatzisarantis, NLD=6602156578en_US
dc.identifier.citeulike4722131-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats