SavedAdd your journal

Journals / CBÜ Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 21 Sayı: 1

Athletic Performance Test Anxiety Scale Development Study (APT-AS)

Atletik Performans Testi Kaygı Ölçeği Geliştirme Çalışması (APT-KÖ)

Aslı Ece Koçak(DÜZCE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0008-0332-842X
Hande Baba Kaya(DÜZCE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-9281-2588
Levent Görün(DÜZCE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1142-3167
Selahattin Akpınar(DÜZCE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1676-4465
Mustafa Koç(DÜZCE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-8644-4109
Pages
109–130
Publication Date
2026-01-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Reliability coefficients were calculated as 0.82 for the physiological dimension, 0.78 for the affective dimension, 0.68 for the cognitive dimension, and 0.86 for the overall scale.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to develop a valid and reliable measurement tool to evaluate the Athletic Performance Test (APT) anxiety levels of football referees.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In the scale development process, a 60-item pool was created through literature review and interviews with 12 referees.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Reliability coefficients were calculated as 0.82 for the physiological dimension, 0.78 for the affective dimension, 0.68 for the cognitive dimension, and 0.86 for the overall scale.
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Futbol hakemleri · Atletik performans testi · Kaygı

Abstract

This study aims to develop a valid and reliable measurement tool to evaluate the Athletic Performance Test (APT) anxiety levels of football referees. The absence of a specific instrument measuring referees' APT anxiety in the literature constitutes the main rationale for this study. In the scale development process, a 60-item pool was created through literature review and interviews with 12 referees. Content validity was evaluated based on expert opinions and inappropriate items were eliminated. Pilot application was conducted with 124 referees using Exploratory Factor Analysis, followed by Confirmatory Factor Analysis with 462 referees. The analyses yielded a three-dimensional, 19-item structure comprising physiological, cognitive, and affective dimensions. Model fit indices were found to be at acceptable levels (CFI=0.933, TLI=0.923, RMSEA=0.063). Reliability coefficients were calculated as 0.82 for the physiological dimension, 0.78 for the affective dimension, 0.68 for the cognitive dimension, and 0.86 for the overall scale. The scale can be used to increase referees' awareness of APT-related anxiety, determine group-level intervention needs, and support psychological preparation processes before APT. Due to the low reliability of the cognitive dimension and the lack of some validity evidence, further development of the scale is recommended in future studies.

Özet

Bu araştırma, futbol hakemlerinin Atletik Performans Testi (APT) kaygı düzeylerini değerlendirmek üzere geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı geliştirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Literatürde hakemlerin APT kaygısını spesifik olarak ölçen bir aracın bulunmaması araştırmanın temel gerekçesini oluşturmaktadır. Ölçek geliştirme sürecinde literatür taraması ve 12 hakem ile görüşmeler yapılarak 60 maddelik havuz oluşturulmuştur. Uzman görüşleri doğrultusunda kapsam geçerliği değerlendirilmiş ve uygun olmayan maddeler elenmiştir. Deneme uygulaması 124 hakeme yapılarak Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi, ardından 462 hakem ile Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Analizler sonucunda fizyolojik, bilişsel ve duyuşsal olmak üzere üç boyutlu, 19 maddelik yapı elde edilmiştir. Model uyum indeksleri kabul edilebilir düzeyde bulunmuştur (CFI=0,933, TLI=0,923, RMSEA=0,063). Güvenirlik katsayıları fizyolojik boyut için 0,82, duyuşsal boyut için 0,78, bilişsel boyut için 0,68 ve toplam ölçek için 0,86 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Ölçek, hakemlerin APT'ye yönelik kaygı farkındalığını artırmak, grup düzeyinde müdahale ihtiyaçlarını belirlemek ve APT öncesi psikolojik hazırlık süreçlerini desteklemek amacıyla kullanılabilir. Bilişsel boyutun düşük güvenirliği ve bazı geçerlik kanıtlarının eksikliği nedeniyle gelecek çalışmalarda ölçeğin geliştirilmesi önerilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Koçak, A. E., Kaya, H. B., Görün, L., Akpınar, S., Koç, M. (2026). Athletic Performance Test Anxiety Scale Development Study (APT-AS). CBÜ Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 21 Sayı: 1, 109–130. https://doi.org/10.33459/cbubesbd.1730543

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (64)

  1. American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). American Psychological Association.
  2. Arslanoğlu, E., Tekin, M., Arslanoğlu, C., ve Özmutlu, İ. (2010). Voleybol hakemlerinin çeşitli değişkenlere göre kaygı ve temel psikolojik ihtiyaç düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(2), 985–995.
  3. Atılgan, D., ve Tükel, Y. (2019). Hakemlerin karar verme stillerinin incelenmesi. Sport Sciences, 14(2), 22-32.
  4. Bartlett, M. S. (1951). The Effect of standardization on a χ² approximation in factor analysis. Biometrika, 38(3/4), 337–344. https://doi.org/10.2307/2332580
  5. Bloß, N., Schorer, J., Loffing, F., ve Büsch, D. (2020). Physical load and referees’ decision-making in sports games: A Scoping review. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 19(1), 149-157.
  6. Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., ve Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A Primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
  7. Bompa, T. O. (2003). Dönemleme antrenman kuramı ve yönetimi. Bağırgan.
  8. Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
  9. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., ve Demirel, F. (2020). Eğitimde bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (28. baskı). Pegem Akademi.
  10. Byrne, B. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (3rd ed.). Routledge.
  11. Canedo Nogueira, D. F., Fontes, L., da Silva Gomes, A. R., ve Coelho Resende da Silva, R. M. (2022). Referees’ emotions and performance perception: The Importance of stress and cognitive appraisal. Cuadernos de Psicología del Deporte, 22(2), 156–170. https://doi.org/10.6018/cpd.468751
  12. Carter, T. B., Gorczynski, P., Coady, C. J., Cunningham, I. J., Mascarenhas, D. R. D., Grant, M., Sullivan, P., Webb, T., Livingston, L. A., ve Hancock, D. J. (2024). Implementing a scoping review to explore sport officials’ mental health. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 6, Article 1436149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2024.1436149
  13. Castagna, C., Abt, G., ve D’Ottavio, S. (2007). Physiological aspects of soccer refereeing performance and training. Sports Medicine, 37(7), 625–646. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200737070-00006
  14. Cel, A. (1994). Hakemlik psikolojisi. Futbol Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 1(1), 21–23.
  15. Comrey, A. L., ve Lee, H. B. (1992). A First course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  16. Cüceloğlu, D. (1994). İnsan ve davranışı: Psikolojinin temel kavramları (5. baskı.). Remzi.
  17. de Winter, J. C. F., Dodou, D. ve Wieringa, P. A. (2009). Exploratory factor analysis with small sample sizes. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44(2), 147–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170902794206
  18. DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage.
  19. Epskamp, S. ve Stuber, S. (2023). semPlot: Path diagrams and graphical displays of SEM models (Version 1.x). Erişim adresi https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=semPlot Erişim tarihi: 11.12.2025.
  20. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., ve Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272
  21. FIFA. (2024). FIFA futbol oyun kuralları kitabı. Erişim adresi https://tff.org/Resources/TFF/Documents/TALIMATLAR/MHK-Talimati.pdf Erişim tarihi: 11.12.2025.
  22. Field, A.P. (2018) Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics. (5th ed.). Sage.
  23. Finney, S. J., & DiStefano, C. (2013). Nonnormal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A Second course (2nd ed.) (ss. 439–492). Information Age.
  24. Flora, D. B. ve Curran, P. J. (2004). An Empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9(4), 466–491. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.466
  25. Fornell, C. ve Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  26. George, D., ve Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A Simple guide and reference (10th ed.). Pearson.
  27. Goretzko, D., Pham, T. T. H. ve Bühner, M. (2021). Exploratory factor analysis: Current use, methodological developments and recommendations for good practice. Current Psychology, 40(7), 3510–3521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00300-2
  28. Guillén, F., ve Feltz, D. L. (2011). A Conceptual model of referee efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 25. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00025
  29. Holgado-Tello, F. P., Chacón-Moscoso, S., Barbero-García, I., ve Vila-Abad, E. (2010). Polychoric versus Pearson correlations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables. Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 44(1), 153–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-008-9190-y
  30. Hu, L. T., ve Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  31. Kaiser, H. F., ve Rice, J. (1974). Little Jiffy, Mark IV. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34(1), 111–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447403400115
  32. Kaplan, D. (2000). Structural equation modeling: Foundations and extensions. Sage.
  33. Kılıç, A. F. (2023). R programlama diliyle A’dan Z’ye ölçek geliştirme. Nobel Akademik.
  34. Kim, H. Y., Chung, E. J., Kim, S. W., ve Lee, B. H. (2022). Effect of judo athletes' psychological function on sports coping skills: Moderated mediating effect of tension. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(11), Article 6634. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19116634
  35. Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press.
  36. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. Oxford University Press.
  37. Lundqvist, C., ve Hassmén, P. (2005). Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2): Evaluating the Swedish version by confirmatory factor analyses. Journal of Sports Sciences, 23(7), 727–736. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410400021484
  38. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., ve Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4(1), 84-99.
  39. Mardia, K. V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57(3), 519–530. https://doi.org/10.2307/2334770
  40. Martens, R., Vealey, R. S., ve Burton, D. (1990). Competitive anxiety in sport. Human Kinetics.
  41. Mascarenhas, D. R., Collins, D., ve Mortimer, P. (2005). The Accuracy, agreement and coherence of decision-making in rugby union officials. Journal of Sports Sciences, 23(3), 253–271.
  42. McEwan, G. P., Unnithan, V. B., Easton, C., Glover, A. J., ve Arthur, R. (2024). Decision-making accuracy of soccer referees in relation to markers of internal and external load. European Journal of Sport Science, 24(6), 659–669. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsc.12096
  43. Nunnally, J. C., ve Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
  44. Oktay, M. C., ve Yıldız, M. (2018). İlk defa deneme dalışı yapan bireylerin sürekli ve durumluk kaygı düzeylerinin çeşitli değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. Kafkas Üniversitesi. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (21), 161-168.
  45. Öner, N. (1994). Türkiye'de kullanılan psikolojik testler. Boğaziçi Yayınları.
  46. R Core Team. (2025). R: A Language and environment for statistical computing (Version 4.x). Erişim adresi https://www.R-project.org/ Erişim tarihi: 11.12.2025.
  47. Revelle, W. (2023). psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research (Version 2.x). Erişim adresi https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych Erişim tarihi: 11.12.2025.
  48. Rice, S. M., Purcell, R., De Silva, S., Mawren, D., McGorry, P. D., ve Parker, A. G. (2016). The Mental health of elite athletes: A Narrative systematic review. Sports Medicine, 46(9), 1333–1353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-016-0492-2
  49. Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
  50. Saraiva, M., Oliveira, S., Coimbra, M. ve Ferreira, C. (2025). Understanding sport anxiety among competitive athletes: The Role of shame, fear of self-compassion and self-criticism. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 23(2), 304–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2024.2308861
  51. Schmidt, S. L., Schmidt, G. J., Padilla, C. S., Simões, E. N., Tolentino, J. C., Barroso, P. R., Narciso, J. H., Godoy, E. S., ve Costa Filho, R. L. (2019). Decrease in attentional performance after repeated bouts of high intensity exercise in association-football referees and assistant referees. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2014. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02014
  52. Sevim, Y. (2002). Antrenman bilgisi. Nobel Akademik.
  53. Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L., Cumming, S. P., ve Grossbard, J. R. (2006). Measurement of multidimensional sport performance anxiety in children and adults: The Sport anxiety scale-2. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 28(4), 479–501. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.28.4.479
  54. Tabachnick, B. G., ve Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.
  55. Tavakol, M., ve Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s Alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53-55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
  56. Turgut, M. F., ve Baykul, Y. (1992). Örnekleme teknikleri. ÖSYM.
  57. Türkiye Futbol Federasyonu. (2025). 2025-2026 futbol sezonu hakem-gözlemci klasmanlarını belirleme yöntemi ve sınav takvimi. Erişim adresi: https://www.tff.org/Resources/TFF/Auto/50920fd970e847aba08f5954cee39c2d.pdf Erişim tarihi: 11.12.2025.
  58. Velicer, W. F. (1976). Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika, 41, 321–327. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02293557
  59. Velicer, W. F., Eaton, C. A., ve Fava, J. L. (2000). Construct explication through factor or component analysis: A Review and evaluation of alternative procedures for determining the number of factors or components. In R. D. Goffin ve E. Helmes (Ed.), Problems and solutions in human assessment: Honoring Douglas N. Jackson at seventy (ss. 41–71). Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  60. Wang, Y., Lei, S. M., ve Fan, J. (2023). Effects of mindfulness-based interventions on promoting athletic performance and related factors among athletes: A Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(3), Article 2038. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032038
  61. Weinberg, R. S., ve Gould, D. (2015). Foundations of sport and exercise psychology (6th ed.). Human Kinetics.
  62. Woodman, T. ve Hardy, L. (2003). The relative impact of cognitive anxiety and self-confidence upon sport performance: A Meta-analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences, 21(6), 443–457. https://doi.org/10.1080/0264041031000101809
  63. Yurdugül, H. (2005). Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında kapsam geçerliği için kapsam geçerlik indekslerinin kullanılması. İçinde XIV. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi Bildiri Kitabı (28–30 Eylül 2005, Denizli) (ss. 1–6). Pamukkale Üniversitesi. Erişim adresi: http://yunus.hacettepe.edu.tr/~yurdugul/3/indir/PamukkaleBildiri.pdf Erişim tarihi: 11.12.2025.
  64. Zhang, L., Zhang, H., Li, S., Ding, J., Peng, Y., ve Huang, Z. (2022). Influence mechanism of the home advantage on referees’ decision-making in modern football field – A Study from sports neuro-decision science. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 873184. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.873184