CC BY
16Team building and teamwork predictors for progress in beginner ice hockey
UDC 796.01:159.9
Dr.Sc.Phil., PhD, Professor G.M. Biryukova1 Dr.Hab., Professor S.M. Ashkinazi1 Dr.Hab., PhD S.I. Kassymbekova2 PhD E.K. Dilmakhambetov2
1 Lesgaft National State University of Physical Education, Sports and Health, Saint-Petersburg (Lesgaft NSU, Saint-Petersburg), Russia 2Al Farabi Kazakh National University, Almaty, Kazakhstan
Corresponding author: [email protected]
M
Abstract
Objective of the study was to analyze the key socio-psychological and motivational predictors for the team building and teamwork in modern beginner ice hockey.
Methods and structure of the study. We formed for the purposes of the study, based on a practical coaching experience, the following two hockey teams: high-performance Group 1 (n= 24) and mid-performance Group 2 (n=23). Both of the groups competed in the 2016-17/ 2017-18 Ice Hockey Federation Open Children's Cup in St. Petersburg for the players born in 2008. Statistical significance of the intergroup test data differences were rated by the MannWhitney U-test. As demonstrated by Table 1, the coach rated Group 1 competitive performance much higher than that of Group 2 based on the following considerations: quality of passes, teamwork, repossessions, gate defenses and counterattacks in the final games of the season
For the team building purposes, the coach set the game roles/ links based on own professional experience and logics and practical analysis of every player's competitive performance plus the key personality traits assumed as critical for the game link/ role success including: game-control thinking; willpower; personality traits: determination, tactical skills/ execution, collectivism/ teamwork; individual technical skills; seasonal physical progress statistics; and seasonal progress goals attained versus the progress forecasts.
Results and conclusions. The findings indicated the possibility of determining the level of team cohesion and teamwork of young hockey players by considering their socio-psychological qualities and skills, influence of the motivational value of parental preferences, and efficient formation of game combinations.
Keywords: game links/ roles, sports motivations, teamwork, team spirit, psychological qualities, ice hockey, sports motivations.
Background. Competitive progress in the modern ice hockey sport has always been ranked among the top priorities by the professional athletic, coaching and sport psychology research communities, with the latter reporting a growing demand for the practical team building and psychological compatibility rating and analyzing tools for improvement of the teamwork on the whole and game links/ roles inside the team in particular [2, 5].
Objective of the study was to analyze the key so-cio-psychological and motivational predictors for the team building and teamwork in modern beginner ice hockey.
Methods and structure of the study. We formed for the purposes of the study, based on a practical coaching experience, the following two hockey teams: high-performance Group 1 (n= 24) and mid-performance Group 2 (n=23). Both of the groups competed in the 2016-17/ 2017-18 Ice Hockey Federation Open Children's Cup in St. Petersburg for the players born in 2008. Statistical significance of the intergroup test data differences were rated by the Mann- Whitney U-test. As demonstrated by Table 1, the coach rated Group 1 competitive performance much higher than that of Group 2 based on the following considerations: quality of passes, teamwork, repossessions, gate de-
Table 1. Group performances rated by coach
Performance groups Mann- Whitney
High-performance Group 1 Moderate-performance Group 2 U-test
Sample n = 24 n = 23
Expert scores on a 10-point scale 6,3 3,5 60,5***
***highly significant difference, р<0.01
fenses and counterattacks in the final games of the season [3].
For the team building purposes, the coach set the game roles/ links based on own professional experience and logics and practical analysis of every player's competitive performance plus the key personality traits assumed as critical for the game link/ role success including: (1) game-control thinking (23.6%); (2) willpower (18.7%); (3) personality traits: determination, tactical skills/ execution, collectivism/ teamwork (16.4%); (4) individual technical skills (14.3%); (5) seasonal physical progress statistics (14.0%); and (6) seasonal progress goals attained versus the progress forecasts (13%).
We rated the game control thinking; volitional qualities; personality traits; individual technical skills; sports performance (rated by the coach); and used the E.E. Khvatskaya Questionnaire Survey method (developed at the Puni Psychology Department of the Lesgaft National State University in St. Petersburg) to rate seven sports motivations; and individual perfectionism [1, 4, 6] tested by the question "Why do you play or want play ice hockey?".
Results and discussion. One of the key athletic performance drivers are the sports motivations ratable by the relevant survey tools: in this case E.E. Khvatskaya Questionnaire Survey method.
The group sports motivation profiles given in Table 2 are different in virtually every key motivation, with the only exception for the family encouragement sports motivation; and it should be noted that those who are motivated mostly by their families demonstrate relatively lower determination and competitive progresses. Note that the intergroup difference is at the statistical trend level (1.9 versus 3.2 points). We should also emphasize that the teamwork motivations are much higher in the high-performance Group 1 (31.7 points versus 27.4 points) although the differences are insig-nificat (p> 0.01).
Of special interest is the fact that the health motivations are lower in the high-performance Group 1 - that may mean that the leading athletes come to the sport for self-assertion/ success related goals rather than for a healthy lifestyle. In other words, some athletes make a fast transition from the initial illusive goals to competitive achievements related ones and are prepared to sacrifice health in the top-intensity trainings and competitions for success.
Having analyzed the group ambitions, we naturally rated 25% of Group 1 high on this scale (including 8.3% and 16.7% of unrealistically and realistically high ones, respectively) - versus only 13.1% in Group 2. This means that Group 1 is highly determined in the sports careers albeit 8.3% of the group are unrealistic
Table 2. Group sports motivations
Motivations rated by the E.E. Performance groups Mann- Whitney
Khvatskaya Questionnaire Survey method High-performance Group 1 Moderate-performance Group 3 U-test
Health sports motivation 23,6 27,9 184*
Cognitive sports motivation 24,5 27,9 238*
Communication sports motivation 11,4 11,3 266
Self-assertion/ success sports motivation 43,9 42,9 255,5*
Teamwork sports motivation 31,7 27,4 206,5*
Progress sports motivation 22,4 25,5 202*
Family encouragement sports motivation 1,9 3,2 111,5**
**р<0.05; *р<0.1
66
Theory and Practice of Physical Culture I teoriya.ru I October № 10 2020
in their ambitions and, hence, may be prone to inadequate/ unpermitted game actions.
Furthermore, the relatively low family encouragement sports motivation was found in most of the highperformance Group 1 (87.5%) - that is indicative of the personal sports motivation being dominant. Group 2 was found somewhat more dependent on the family support (69.3%) although 70% of the group was still tested with good sport progress/ success motivations and determination in ice hockey. The family encouragement sports motivation was tested on average higher in Group 2 versus Group 1 (17.4% versus 12.5%, respectively).
Conclusion. The high-performance and ambitious Group 1 was tested with the high sport-specific personality traits including benevolence, good communication skills, attentiveness, compassion, responsibility, team spirit and conflict tolerance. The group, however, is still partially prone to non-acknowledgment of own errors, emotionally vulnerable to losses, disrespectful to other opinions (unauthorized) i.e. tend to act in their own ways - that is (1) natural for this age group, and (2) natural for the ambitious, emotional and gifted players focused on dominance, success and progress in every domain.
The high-performance Group 1 was also tested higher than Group 2 on the determination, competitive spirit, energy and self-confidence rating scales, with the key role played by the teamwork and self-assertion motivations deemed beneficial for the team building for joint competitive progress - as verified by the actual success records.
Ambitions in the moderate-performance Group 2 are significantly correlated with the self-assertion motivations - that in practical terms are associated with potential performance volatility and unpredictability. It is important that more than one third of the group is tested with psychological discomforts and dissat-
isfactions with the circumstances and experiences - that may be due to their high dependence on the family motivations imposed on them by the adult family leaders. Such athletes are often tested with high suggestibility, trustfulness, high need for communication, compassion and recognition associated with curiosity. Of special interest is that 13.3% of the group was tested with the high dependence on family support and dissatisfactions with some psychologically undesirable aspects (more than 30%) - that means that the group is low motivated for the team building and teamwork, as verified by the still low actual competitive progress rates.
References
1. Biryukova G.M., Obozov N.N., Polezhaeva O.D. Instrumental modeling of harmony and consistency in sports teams activity. Uchenye zapiski universiteta im. P.F Lesgafta. 2018. No.4 (158). pp. 384-387.
2. Vorobev M.I., Bryznak S.S. Role of personal qualities in predicting psychological compatibility of athletes in teams. Sportivny psikholog. 2009. No. 2 (17). pp. 19-22.
3. Popov G.I. Scientific and methodological activity in sports. Moscow: Akademiya publ., 2015. 192 p.
4. Raspopova A.S. Age features of display of perfectionism in sports. PhD diss.. Krasnodar, 2012. 299 p.
5. Gould D., Dieffenbach K., Moffett A. Psychological characteristics and their development in Olympic champions. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. 2002. No. 4. pp. 172-204.
6. Madigan D. J., Stoeber J. Perfectionism Predicts Injury in Junior Athletes: Preliminary Evidence from a Prospective Study. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2018. No.36 (5). pp. 545-550.
