Journals / SPORMETRE Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 4

WEARABLE TECHNOLOGICAL SPORTS PRODUCTS PERCEPTION SCALE: A SCALE ADAPTATION STUDY

GİYİLEBİLİR TEKNOLOJİK SPOR ÜRÜNLERİ KULLANIM ALGISI ÖLÇEĞİ: BİR ÖLÇEK UYARLAMA ÇALIŞMASI

Pages
113–124
DOI
—
🏛️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)

As a result of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyzes, it was found that the Turkish version of the scale supported the 30 item and 6 factor structure.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study is to adapt the Wearable Technological Sports Products Perception Scale, original developed in English by Song, J., Kim, J., and Cho, K. (2018), to Turkish and conduct the reliability and validity studies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:As a result of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyzes, it was found that the Turkish version of the scale supported the 30 item and 6 factor structure.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of the data obtained, it can be stated that the Turkish form of Wearable Technological Sports Products Perception Scale is a valid and reliable measurement tool.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Spor · Giyilebilir Teknoloji · Giyilebilir Spor Teknoloji Ürünleri

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to adapt the Wearable Technological Sports Products Perception Scale, original developed in English by Song, J., Kim, J., and Cho, K. (2018), to Turkish and conduct the reliability and validity studies. The sample of the study is five hundred fifty people who use wearable technological sports products and participate voluntarily in the study. The original Wearable Technological Sports Products Perception Scale is a five point likert scale and includes thirty-one items and nine sub-dimensions. As a result of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyzes, it was found that the Turkish version of the scale supported the 30 item and 6 factor structure. The reliability coefficients of the subscales of the scale vary between 0.77-0.87. As a result of the data obtained, it can be stated that the Turkish form of Wearable Technological Sports Products Perception Scale is a valid and reliable measurement tool.

Özet

Bu araştırmanın amacı, orijinal formu İngilizce olarak Song, J., Kim, J. ve Cho, K. (2018) tarafından geliştirilen Giyilebilir Teknolojik Spor Ürünleri Kullanım Algısı Ölçeği’ni Türkçeye uyarlayarak geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmalarını yapmaktır. Çalışmanın örneklemini giyilebilir teknolojik spor ürünü kullanan ve çalışmaya gönüllü olarak katılan 550 kişi oluşturmaktadır. Giyilebilir Teknolojik Spor Ürünleri Kullanım Algısı Ölçeği’nin orijinali 5’li likert tipi 31 madde ve 9 alt boyuttan oluşmaktadır. Açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri sonucu açıklanan varyans değeri %64,9 olarak tespit edilen ölçeğin, Türkçe formunun 30 maddeli ve 6 faktörlü yapıyı desteklediği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Ölçeğin alt boyutlarına ait güvenirlik katsayıları ise 0.77-0.87 aralığında değişmektedir. Sonuç olarak elde edilen veriler kapsamında Giyilebilir Teknolojik Spor Ürünleri Kullanım Algısı Ölçeği’nin Türkçe formunun geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğu belirlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

YÜCE, A., AYDOĞDU, V., KATIRCI, H., YÜCE, S. G. (2020). WEARABLE TECHNOLOGICAL SPORTS PRODUCTS PERCEPTION SCALE: A SCALE ADAPTATION STUDY. SPORMETRE Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 4, 113–124. https://ajindex.com/articles/338929

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Adapa, A., Nah, F.F.H., Hall, R.H., Siau, K., Smith, S.N. (2018). Factors influencing the adoption of smart wearable devices. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 34(5), 399-409.
  2. Brislin, R.W. (1970). Back translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Pyschology, 1(3), 185-216.
  3. Caddy, B. (2019). Are fitness trackers the future of healthcare. https://www.techradar.com/news/are-fitness-trackers-the-future-of-healthcare
  4. Campbell, D.T., Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81-105.
  5. Canhoto, A.I., Arp, S. (2017). Exploring the factors that support adoption and sustained use of health and fitness wearables. Journal of Marketing Management, 33(1-2), 32-60.
  6. CCS Insight (2015). https://www.ccsinsight.com/press/company-news/2332-wearables-market-to-be-worth-25-billion-by-2019-reveals-ccs-insight/
  7. Chau, K. Y., Lam, M. H. S., Cheung, M. L., Tso, E. K. H., Flint, S. W., Broom, D. R.,. Lee, K. Y. (2019). Smart technology for healthcare: Exploring the antecedents of adoption intention of healthcare wearable technology. Health Psychology Research, 7(1). Coelho, G.L., Monteiro, R.P., Hanel, P.H., Vilar, R., Gouveia, V.V., Maio, G.R. (2018). Psychometric parameters of an abbreviated vengeance scale across two countries. Personality and Individual Differences, 120, 185-192.
  8. Cortina, J.M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104.
  9. Cottle K.E. (2017). Current patterns of ownership and usage of mobile technology in older adults. MsC Thesis, Brigham Young University. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7521&context=etd
  10. Creswell, J.W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. (4th Edition). Boston: Pearson Prentice Hall. Dehghani, M., Kim, K.J., Dangelico, R.M. (2018). Will smartwatches last? Factors contributing to intention to keep using smart wearable technology. Telematics and Informatics, 35(2), 480-490.
  11. Dehghani, M., Dangelico, R.M. (2017). Smart wearable technologies: Current status and market orientation through a patent analysis. In Industrial Technology (ICIT), 2017 IEEE International Conference on (pp. 1570–1575).
  12. IEEE. DeVellis, R.F. (2016). Scale development: Theory and applications (Vol. 26). Sage publications. Duffy, J. (2014). The best activity trackers for fitness. http