CC BY
41s
2016 Ш
A comparative analysis of flow state in basketball performance:
a psychological probe
Nishan Singh Deol1, Davinder Singh2
'Department of Physical Education, Punjabi University, Patiala, India 2Department of Physical Education, D.A.V College, Amritsar, India
Abstract:
Purpose: The present study was conducted to examine the flow state in basketball performance. Materials: The investigator had selected Forty Five (N=45) female basketball players of 19 to 25 years of age to act as subjects. They were divided into three groups; (i.e., N=15; District, N =15; State and N3=15 National). The purposive sampling technique was used to select the subjects. All the subjects, after having been informed about the objective and protocol of the study, gave their consent and volunteered to participate in this study. Statistical Analyses: To measure the level of dispositional flow state of the subjects, the flow state battery constructed by Jackson & Eklund (2004) was administered. One way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was employed to find out the intra-group differences. Where F values were found significant, LSD (Least Significant Difference) Post-hoc test was applied to find out the direction and degree of difference. For testing the hypotheses, the level of significance was set at 0.05. Results & Conclusion: The results revealed no significant differences were found among female basketball players on the sub-variables of Dispositional Flow Scale-2 i.e., Challenge Skill Balance, Action-Awareness Merging, Clear Goals, Unambiguous Feedback, Concentration on the Task at Hand, Sense of Control, Loss of Self-Consciousness, Time transformation and Autotelic experience.
Keywords:
flow, dispositional, state, basketball, players.
Нишан Сингх Деол, Давиндер Сингх. Сравнительный анализ характеристик структуры движений в баскетболе: психологический тест. Цель: настоящее исследование было проведено с целью изучения состояния характеристик движений в баскетболе. Материал: для исследования были выбраны сорок пять (N = 45) женщин баскетболисток возрастом от 19 до 25 лет. Они были разделены на три группы в соответствие с масштабом их участия в соревнованиях: (N1 = 15, район; N2 = 15, штат; N3 = 15 - страна). Была использована целенаправленная техника выборки, чтобы выбрать испытуемых. Все испытуемые были проинформированы о цели и содержании исследования и дал свое согласие и желание принять участие в этом исследовании. Статистический анализ: Для измерения уровня диспозиционного состоянии испытуемых использована батарея тестов, предложенная Джексоном и Эклундом (2004). Был использован один из способов анализа дисперсии (ANOVA) для определения различий внутри группы. Если были найдены значительные значения F, тогда после специальной процедуры применялся тест LSD (наименее существенное различие) для определения направления и степени различия. Для проверки гипотез, уровень значимости был установлен на уровне 0,05. Результаты и Выводы: Результаты не показали существенных различий среди женщин баскетболистов на суб-переменных в диспозиционных движениях по Шкале-2: соревновательный баланс навыков, действия, информированность, объединение, четкие цели, однозначная обратная связь, концентрация на задаче, чувство контроля, потеря самосознания, преобразования во времени, жизненно важный опыт.
движение, диспозиционные, структура, баскетбол, игроки.
Нишан Сингх Деол, Давиндер Сингх. Порiвняльний аналiз характеристик структури pyxiB в баскетболк пси-холопчний тест. Мета: дослщжен-ня було проведено з метою вивчення стану характеристик pyxiB у баскетбо-лк Матерал: для дослщження були обран сорок п'ять (N = 45) жЫок бас-кетболюток вком вщ 19 до 25 роюв. Вони були роздтеж на три групи у вщповщност з масштабом Тх учас-т у змаганнях: (N1 = 15, район; N2 = 15, штат; N3 = 15 - кратна). Була ви-користана цтеспрямована технка ви-бipки, щоб вибрати пщдослщних. Вс пщдослщж були проЫформоваж про цо та змют дослщження i дали свою згоду i бажання взяти участь у цьому дослщженнк Статистичний анал'з: Для вимipювання piвня дюпозЩюнно-го стану випробовуваних використана батарея тест1в, запропонована Джексоном i Еклундом (2004). Був використа-ний один i3 способiв аналiзy дисперсм (ANOVA) для визначення вщмЫностей усередиы групи. Якщо були знайдеж значн значення F, тодi пюля спе^аль-ноТ процедури застосовувався тест LSD (найменш ютотна вщмшнють) для визначення напрямку i ступеню вщмш-ностк Для пеpевipки ппотез piвень значимой був встановлений на piвнi 0,05. Результати та Висновки: Результати не показали ютотних вщмшностей серед жшок баскетболю^в на суб-змЫних в дюпозЩюнних рухах за Шкалою-2: змагальний баланс навичок, дм, Ыфор-мованють, об'еднання, ч™ цл одно-значний зворотний зв'язок, концен-тpацiя на завданнi, почуття контролю, втрата самосвiдомостi, перетворення в чаа, життево важливий досвiд.
рух, диспозицйний, структура, баскетбол, гравцi.
Introduction
Understanding the psychological factors that accompany successful athletic performance is a high priority for applied sport psychology, with a major area of focus being mental links to optimal performance. To advance knowledge in this area, it is important to examine specific psychological constructs with theoretical relevance to optimal performance in order to understand what psychological processes might be contributing to quality of performance. The first and primary construct examined was flow. Flow is an optimal psychological state that occurs when there is a balance between perceived challenges and skills in an activity [3]. According to Jackson, [8] flow experience during exercise can lead to high enjoyment, which, in turn, appears to play an important role in exercise adherence [9, 10, 14]. To advance knowledge in this area, it is important to examine specific
© Nishan Singh Deol, Davinder Singh, 2015 http://dx.doi.org/10.15561/18189172.2016.0107
psychological constructs with theoretical relevance to optimal performance in order to understand what psychological processes might be contributing to quality of performance. Empirical research has substantiated this prediction [16]. Hence, an understanding of factors that promote flow states in exercise will inform the strategies of exercise practitioners who are interested in promoting enjoyment and adherence to exercise. Jackson and Eklund [18] developed and revised the dispositional flow scale (DFS-2) to assess athletes'experience of the nine flow characteristics. In addition, Kimiecik and Harris [13] suggested that flow leads to positive affective reactions, which they equate with enjoyment. Research has shown that each one of these dimension is part of the definition of flow [9, 10, 12]. Using in-depth interviews, Jackson [8], Sugiyama and Inomata [17], and Young [19] assessed athletes' responses regarding the importance of the nine dimensions of flow, as proposed by Csikszentmihalyi (1975). Sugiyama and Inomata [17] investigated the
I nEflArOHKA I Ta MeflMK0"6i0^0riHHi
- - npoô^eMM ^i3MHHoro
BMXoBaHHA i cnopTy _
ncMxoflorm
flow experience among semi-professional and university athletes, who were between 18 and 29 years of age, representing three sports, namely, track and field, skating, and swimming. The investigations on flow during sport performance have focused on three main research topics. Firstly, to refine the understanding of the flow construct, as proposed by Csikszentmihalyi [2,3] in a sport context, several studies have analysed qualitative results and their connection to flow dimensions [8, 17,19]. The findings of these studies will be presented concurrently to point out similarities or differences in the flow experience between groups of elite athletes from various sports [6, 7] college and university athletes Sugiyama & Inomata, [17] and elite tennis players Young [19]. Flow is generally viewed as a peak performance state, and there is some support for this assumption [11, 15]. It appears that attaining flow during exercise may promote intrinsic motivation, which, in turn, has been shown to enhance persistence in participation Ryan et al. [16]. Brewer et al. [1] noted that the effect of performance outcome on self-report assessments of psychological states could be compromised by methods of retrospective introspection. The athletes are asked about general experiences of the flow experience in a particular activity the athlete chooses. Another scale developed by the same authors is the flow state scale-2 (FSS-2), which assesses the flow state right after completing an activity. As a result, the present study was conducted to determine the significant difference between Flow State in basketball players with regards to dispositional Flow Scale-2.
Method and Procedure
Sample: The investigators had selected Forty Five (N=45) female basketball players of 19 to 25 years of age to act as subjects. They were divided into three groups; (i.e., N =15; District, N2=15; State and N3=15 National). The purposive sampling technique was used to select the subjects. All the subjects, after having been informed about the objective and protocol of the study, gave their
consent and volunteered to participate in this study.
Instrument. To measure the level of Dispositional Flow State of the subjects, the Flow State Battery constructed by (Jackson & Eklund, 2004) was administered.
Statistical Analysis: One way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was employed to find out the intra-group differences. Where F values were found significant, LSD (Least Significant Difference) Post-hoc test was applied to find out the direction and degree of difference. For testing the hypotheses, the level of significance was set at 0.05.
Results Discussion
It can be seen from table-1 that insignificant differences were found with regard to the sub-variable Challenge Skill Balance among District, State and National female basketball players as the P-value (Sig.) .346 was found higher than the 0.05 level of significance (p>0.05).
It can be seen from table-2 that insignificant differences were found with regard to the sub-variable Action-Awareness Merging among District, State and National female basketball players as the P-value (Sig.) .499 was found higher than the 0.05 level of significance (p>0.05).
It can be seen from table-3 that insignificant differences were found with regard to the sub-variable Clear Goals among District, State and National female basketball players as the P-value (Sig.) .756 was found higher than the 0.05 level of significance (p>0.05).
It can be seen from table-4 that insignificant differences were found with regard to the sub-variable Unambiguous Feedback among District, State and National female basketball players as the P-value (Sig.) .813 was found higher than the 0.05 level of significance (p>0.05).
It can be seen from table-5 that insignificant differences were found with regard to the sub-variable Concentration on the Task at Hand among District, State and National female basketball players as the P-value (Sig.) .155 was found higher than the 0.05 level of significance (p>0.05).
Table 1. Significant differences in the results among Female Basketball Players with regard to dispositional Flow Scale-2 on the sub-Variable Challenge skill balance.
Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degree of Freedom Mean Square F-value P-value (Sig.)
Between Groups 32.933 2 16.467
Within Groups 635.067 42 15.121 1.089 .346
Total 668.000 44
*Significant at 0.05
Table 2. Significant differences in the results among Female Basketball Players with regard to Dispositional Flow Scale-2 on the sub-Variable Action-Awareness Merging.
Source of Sum of Degree of Mean Square F-value P-value
Variation Squares Freedom (Sig.)
Between Groups 22.711 2 11.356 .707 .499
Within Groups 674.533 42 16.060
Total 697.244 44
*Significant at 0.05
s
2016 S
It can be seen from table-6 that insignificant differences were found with regard to the sub-variable Sense of Control among District, State and National female basketball players as the P-value (Sig.) .637 was found higher than the 0.05 level of significance (p>0.05)
It can be seen from table-7 that insignificant differences were found with regard to the sub-variable Loss of Self-
Consciousness among District, State and National female basketball players as the P-value (Sig.) .249 was found higher than the 0.05 level of significance (p>0.05).
It can be seen from table-8 that insignificant differences were found with regard to the sub-variable Transformation of Time among District, State and National female basketball players as the P-value (Sig.)
Table 3. Significant differences in the results among Female Basketball Players with regard to Dispositional Flow Scale-2 on the sub-Variable Clear Goals.
Source of Variation
Sum of Squares Degree of Freedom Mean Square
F-value P-value (Sig.)
Between Groups Within Groups Total
16.044
1194.267
1210.311
2
42 44
8.022 28.435
.282
.756
*Significant at 0.05
Table 4. Significant differences in the results among Female Basketball Players with regard to Dispositional Flow Scale-2 on the sub-Variable Unambiguous Feedback.
Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degree of Freedom Mean Square F-value P-value (Sig.)
Between Groups 5.644 2 2.822 .208 .813
Within Groups 569.333 42 13.556
Total 574.978 44
*Significant at 0.05
Table 5. Significant differences in the results among Female Basketball Players with regard to Dispositional Flow Scale-2 on the sub-Variable Concentration on the Task at Hand.
Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degree of Freedom Mean Square F-value P-value (Sig.)
Between Groups 41.378 2 20.689 1.952 .155
Within Groups 445.200 42 10.600
Total 486.578 44
*Significant at 0.05
Table 6. Significant differences in the results among Female Basketball Players with regard to Dispositional Flow Scale-2 on the sub-Variable Sense of Control.
Source of Sum of Squares Degree of Mean Square F-value P-value
Variation Freedom (Sig.)
Between Groups 13.911 2 6.956 .456 .637
Within Groups 641.333 42 15.270
Total 655.244 44
*Significant at 0.05
Table 7. Significant differences in the results among Female Basketball Players with regard to Dispositional Flow Scale-2
on the sub-Variable Loss of Self-Consciousness.
Source of Variation Sum of Degree of Mean Square F-value P-value
Squares Freedom (Sig.)
Between Groups 58.533 2 29.267 1.439 .249
Within Groups 854.267 42 20.340
Total 912.800 44
*Significant at 0.05
I nEflArOHKA I Ta MeflHK0_6i0^0riHHi
U^S^U0^0^1^! BHX0BaHHA i cn0pTy _
Table 8. Significant differences in the results among Female Basketball Players with regard to Dispositional Flow Scale-2 on the sub-Variable Transformation of Time.
Source of Sum of Degree of Mean Square F-value P-value
Variation Squares Freedom (Sig.)
Between Groups 164.311 2 82.156 6.600 .133
Within Groups 522.800 42 12.448
Total 687.111 44
*Significant at 0.05
Table 9. Significant differences in the results among Female Basketball Players with regard to Dispositional Flow Scale-2 on the sub-Variable Autotelic Experience.
Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degree of Freedom Mean Square F-value P-value (Sig.)
Between Groups 141.911 2 70.956 3.225 .050
Within Groups 924.000 42 22.000
Total 1065.911 44
*Significant at 0.05
Table 10. Significant differences in the results among Female Basketball Players with regard to Dispositional Flow Scale-2.
Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degree of Freedom Mean Square F-value P-value (Sig.)
Between Groups 5.911 2 2.956 .012 .988
Within Groups 10408.667 42 247.825
Total 10414.578 44
*Significant at 0.05
.133 was found higher than the 0.05 level of significance (p>0.05).
It can be seen from table-9 that insignificant differences were found with regard to the sub-variable Autotelic Experience among District, State and National female basketball players as the P-value (Sig.) .050 was found higher than the 0.05 level of significance (p>0.05).
It can be seen from table-10 that insignificant differences were found with regard to the variable Dispositional Flow Scale-2 among District, State and National female basketball players as the P-value (Sig.) .988 was found higher than the 0.05 level of significance (p>0.05).
Conclusion
Summarizing from the above findings we can say that no significant differences were found among female basketball players on the sub-variables of Dispositional Flow Scale-2 i.e., Challenge skill balance, Action-awareness merging, Clear goals, Unambiguous feedback, Concentration on the task at hand, Sense of control, Loss of self-consciousness, Time transformation and Autotelic experience.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declare, that there are no potential conflicts of interest in respect to research, authorship, and/ or publication of this article.
References
1. Brewer BW, Van RJL, Linder DE, & Van RNS. Peak Performance and the Perils of Retrospective Introspection. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 1991;8(3):227-238.
2. Csikszentmihalyi M. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1975.
3. Csikszentmihalyi M. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper & Row; 1990.
4. Csikszentmihalyi M. A Response to Kimiecik & Stein and Jackson Papers. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 1992;4(2):181-183.
5. Dishman RK, Sallis JF, & Orenstein DR. The Determinants of Physical Activity and Exercise. Public Health Reports, 1985;100(1):158-170.
6. Jackson SA. Athletes in Flow: A Qualitative Investigation of Flow States in Elite Figure Skaters. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 1992;4(2):161-180.
7. Jackson SA. Factors Influencing the Occurrence of Flow in Elite Athletes. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 1995;7(2):138-166.
8. Jackson SA. Towards a Conceptual Understanding of the Flow Experience in Elite Athletes. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 1996;67(1):76-90.
9. Jackson SA, & Csikszentmihalyi M. Flow in Sports. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 1999.
10.Jackson SA, & Eklund RC. The Flow Scales Manual. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology; 2004.
11.Jackson SA, & Roberts GC. Positive Performance States of Athletes: Toward a Conceptual Understanding of Peak Performance. The Sport Psychologist, 1992;6(2):156-171.
12.Jackson SA, Kimiecik JC, Ford S, & Marsh HW. Psychological Correlates of Flow in Sport. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 1998;20(4):358-378.
13.Kimiecik JC, & Harris AT. What is Enjoyment? A Conceptual Definitional Analysis with Implications for Sport and Exercise Psychology. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1996;18(3):257-263.
14.Martin JE, & Dubbert PM. Exercise Applications and Promotion in Behavioural Medicine: Current Status and Future Directions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1982;50(6):1004-1017.
15.McInman AD, & Grove JR. Peak Moments in Sport: A Literature Review. Quest, 1991;43:333-351.
16.Ryan RM, Frederick CM, Lepes D, Rubio N, & Sheldon KM. Intrinsic Motivation and Exercise Adherence. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 1997;28(4):335-354.
17.Sugiyama T, & Inomata K. Qualitative Examination of Flow Experience among Top Japanese Athletes. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2005;100(3):969-982.
18.Wankel LM. Personal and Situational Factors Affecting Exercise Involvement: The Importance of Enjoyment. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 1985;56(3):275-282.
19.Young JA. Professional Tennis Players in the Zone. In Haake SJ, & Coe A. (Eds.), Tennis Science & Technology, 2000. P. 417422.
20.Deci EL, & Ryan RM. Intrinsic Motivation and Self- Determination in Human Behavior. New York and London: Plenum Press;
1985.
Информация об авторах:
Information about the authors:
Нишан Сингх Деол; http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4297-9029; ds_rajput87@yahoo.in; Отдел физической культуры, Панджаби университета; НХ 64, Патиала, Пенджаб, 147002, Индия.
Nishan Singh Deol; http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4297-9029; ds_rajput87@yahoo.in; Department of Physical Education, Punjabi University; NH 64, Patiala, Punjab, India, 147002; India.
Давиндер Сингх; http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6208-1895; davinder.singhrajput41@gmail.com; Департамент физической культуры, Д.В.А. Колледж; Катра Шер Синх, И/С Хатхи Гате, АМРИТСАК, Ринджаб-143001, Индия.
Davinder Singh; http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6208-1895; davinder.singhrajput41@gmail.com; Department of Physical Education, D.A.V. College; Katra Sher Singh, I/S Hathi Gate, AMRITSAR, Punjab-143001, India.
Цитируйте эту статью как: Нишан Сингх Деол, Давиндер Сингх. Сравнительный анализ характеристик структуры движений в баскетболе: психологический тест // Педагопка, психолопя та медико-бюлопчш проблеми фiзичного виховання i спорту. - 2016. - N1. - С. 47-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.15561/18189172.2016.0107
Cite this article as: Nishan Singh Deol, Davinder Singh. A comparative analysis of flow state in basketball performance: a psychological probe. Pedagogics, psychology, medical-biologicalproblems of physical training and sports, 2016;1:47-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.15561/18189172.2016.0107
Электронная версия этой статьи является полной и может быть найдена на сайте: http://www.sportpedagogy.org.ua/html/arhive. html
The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.sportpedagogy.org.ua/html/arhive-e.html
Это статья Открытого Доступа распространяется под терминами Creative Commons Attribution License, которая разрешает неограниченное использование, распространение и копирование любыми средствами, обеспечивающими должное цитирование этой оригинальной статьи (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/4.0/deed.ru).
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/4.0/deed.en).
Дата поступления в редакцию: 18.01.2016 Принята: 29.01.2016; Опубликована: 30.01.2016
Received: 18.01.2016
Accepted: 29.01.2016; Published: 30.01.2016
