2012
DOI: 10.1080/10413200.2011.607486
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Team Attributions in Sport: A Meta-Analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

4
56
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(62 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
4
56
2
Order By: Relevance
“…As a consistent (moderate) relationship that has been found linking cohesion to team performance , Bruner et al (2013) suggest that the overwhelming focus on group cohesion within team-building interventions is to be expected. That said, in light of recent meta-analytic evidence (Martin, Carron, & Burke, 2009) that additional group dynamics factors are implicated in the success of teambuilding interventions, Bruner et al (2013) also concluded that 'the restricted focus on cohesion suggests that research conducted within the area of team building in sport is relatively narrow' (p. 37). In the meta-analysis by Martin et al (2009), team-building interventions underpinned by the development of cohesion were related to a number of adaptive outcomes (including improved performance, cognitions, and cohesion itself), with the overall effect sizes ranging from Hedges g = 0.486 for those interventions focused on interpersonal relations, g = 0.471 for adventure programs and g = 0.161 for combination interventions.…”
Section: Measuring Teamworkmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As a consistent (moderate) relationship that has been found linking cohesion to team performance , Bruner et al (2013) suggest that the overwhelming focus on group cohesion within team-building interventions is to be expected. That said, in light of recent meta-analytic evidence (Martin, Carron, & Burke, 2009) that additional group dynamics factors are implicated in the success of teambuilding interventions, Bruner et al (2013) also concluded that 'the restricted focus on cohesion suggests that research conducted within the area of team building in sport is relatively narrow' (p. 37). In the meta-analysis by Martin et al (2009), team-building interventions underpinned by the development of cohesion were related to a number of adaptive outcomes (including improved performance, cognitions, and cohesion itself), with the overall effect sizes ranging from Hedges g = 0.486 for those interventions focused on interpersonal relations, g = 0.471 for adventure programs and g = 0.161 for combination interventions.…”
Section: Measuring Teamworkmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…That said, in light of recent meta-analytic evidence (Martin, Carron, & Burke, 2009) that additional group dynamics factors are implicated in the success of teambuilding interventions, Bruner et al (2013) also concluded that 'the restricted focus on cohesion suggests that research conducted within the area of team building in sport is relatively narrow' (p. 37). In the meta-analysis by Martin et al (2009), team-building interventions underpinned by the development of cohesion were related to a number of adaptive outcomes (including improved performance, cognitions, and cohesion itself), with the overall effect sizes ranging from Hedges g = 0.486 for those interventions focused on interpersonal relations, g = 0.471 for adventure programs and g = 0.161 for combination interventions. Nevertheless, it is particularly noteworthy that team-building interventions in sport that focused on goal setting (one of the teamwork behaviors incorporated in our conceptual framework) demonstrated the strongest effect sizes (Hedges g = 0.714) in this meta-analysis.…”
Section: Measuring Teamworkmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Game outcome is not the only measure of performance in soccer and if the team's performance or league standing had improved, this might not be related to any perceived changes in cohesion brought about by the intervention. For sport researchers, changes in playing personnel (or manager) during the course of a season for professional sport teams adds to the challenge of trying to assess the influence of PDMS (and other team-building interventions) on important team variables (Martin et al, 2009). The constraints on time allowed for some data collection; however, a lack of congruent data for all players illustrates what has been aptly termed the "chaotic reality of many applied settings" (Gilbourne & Richardson, 2005; p.652).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the importance placed on team-building strategies, there remains a lack of specific evidence-based practice supporting effective team interventions within the sport psychology literature (see Pain & Harwood, 2009). Techniques documented in the literature often fail to extend beyond education, social activities, and events (Eys et al, 2010;Martin et al, 2009). To illustrate, observational studies have documented changes in cohesion due to role clarity education (i.e., ensuring the individual's role within the group is accepted and understood) and team goal-setting exercises (Holt & Sparkes, 2001;Senecal, Loughhead, & Bloom, 2008).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation