Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 403 items for :

Clear All
Restricted access

Adam J. Nichol, Edward T. Hall, Will Vickery and Philip R. Hayes

). Although North’s ( 2017 ) critical realist critique of coaching science literature presented a potentially valuable framework for interdisciplinary thinking and research with scope to advance the field, it reviewed broad coaching literature (i.e., not solely dedicated to relationships between coaching

Restricted access

Tim Woodman and Lew Hardy

We (Hardy, Woodman, & Carrington, 2004) recently proposed an innovative segmental quadrant analysis for exploring the role of self-confidence within a higher-order catastrophe model framework. Using this exploratory analysis, we found initial support for the main hypothesis, namely that the maximum interaction effect size between cognitive anxiety and somatic anxiety would be located at a lower level along the somatic anxiety continuum for conditions of low self-Cong compared to conditions of high self-confidence. In the present issue of this journal, Tenenbaum and Becker (2005) offer a critique of this study. In formulating their critique they have employed four principal approaches: (a) a largely indiscriminate critique of catastrophe model research as a whole; (b) a more specific critique of the method and analysis employed in our study; (c) a misrepresentation of our own work and that of previous authors; and (d) abundant confusion and irrelevancy. We address each of these issues in turn.

Restricted access

Hal A. Lawson

I offer a critique of Richard Tinning’s analysis of dominant discourses, problem setting, and teacher education pedagogies. I begin by capsulizing his argument. Then I amend his definition of discourse. Next, I take issue with the way he connects discourses to the process of problem setting. After suggesting new avenues for research on problem setting, I disagree with Tinning’s problem setting, raising questions about his categorizations, assumptions, and silences. Finally, I agree with Tinning’s call for alternative pedagogies. After indicating that he has not provided all of the information and assistance we require, I conclude by requesting a practice-centered orientation in future papers.

Restricted access

Chris Harwood, Lew Hardy and Austin Swain

This article presents a critical analysis of the conceptualization and measurement of achievement goals in sport. It highlights conceptual and measurement inconsistencies of Nicholls’s (1984) achievement-goal theory in education with respect to its applicability to sport. It proposes that differentiation between ability and effort does not underpin the activation of task and ego goal perspectives in a sport performance context and that the definitions of task and ego involvement in the classroom might not generalize to sport. It offers an alternative conceptual approach incorporating three goal perspectives, as both a theoretical and a practical solution. It addresses goal involvement in sport performance contexts by emphasizing the value of assessing self-referent and normative conceptions of achievement at different time frames. Overall, this critique attempts to advance our understanding of both achievement goals and individual performers in the competitive sport domain.

Restricted access

Critiqué par Michel Vigneault

Restricted access

Allen Guttmann

Restricted access

Victoria Paraschak

Restricted access

David L. Shields and Brenda Jo Bredemeier

Restricted access

Christine Seidl, Greg Reid and David L. Montgomery

Recently there has been a plethora of research investigating various dimensions of the cardiovascular fitness of mentally retarded persons. It is clearly documented that as a group, mentally retarded persons are particularly low in aerobic fitness. Although there is evidence that such low cardiovascular functioning can be increased, exercise training studies have invariably ignored the important questions of reliability and validity of the dependent measures. Also, there are innumerable testing protocols that make cross-study comparisons tenuous. Several factors are fundamental to the reliability and validity of standardized protocols that have recently been used with retarded persons. These include underlying assumptions of cadence adherence, constant efficiency, learning, and motivation to perform optimally. The development of cardiovascular test protocols for use with retarded persons is necessary to provide for their immediate and future needs in cardiovascular fitness evaluation.