KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Akdeniz Spor Bilimleri Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 4 Sayı: 2

Takım Uyumu ve Takım Başarısı Arasındaki İlişki: Üniversite Hentbol 2. Lig Takımları Örneği

The Relationship Between Group Cohesion and Team Achievement: The Case of University Handball 2. League Teams

İlknur Özdemir(PAMUKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, ACIPAYAM MESLEK YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0002-7405-375X
Ali Sevilmiş(KARAMANOĞLU MEHMETBEY ÜNİVERSİTESİ, BEDEN EĞİTİMİ VE SPOR YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0001-8338-5927
Sayfa
193–209
Yayın Tarihi
2021-08-28
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Sonuç olarak takımların başarılı sıralamasında üst noktalara çıkmaları için görev uyumunun gerekli olmakla birlikte yeterli olmadığı, en alt lig düzeyindeki takımlarda yüksek sosyal uyumun başarısızlığa neden olabileceği ve erkeklerin kazanmak için kadınlardan daha fazla görev uyumu sergiledikleri belirlenmiştir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Çalışma aynı lig düzeyinde (2. lig) rekabetçi hentbol takımlarının, takım/grup uyumu (group cohesion) düzeyine göre başarı sıralamasını değerlendirmek ve takım uyumu ile başarı sıralaması arasındaki ilişkiyi belirlemek amacıyla yapılmıştır.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Takım uyumu Carron ve ark. (1985) tarafından geliştirilen, Türk sporcularına Unutmaz ve ark (2014) tarafından uyarlanan Takım Birlikteliği Envanteri (Group Environment Questinnaire-GEQ) ile belirlenmiştir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Sonuç olarak takımların başarılı sıralamasında üst noktalara çıkmaları için görev uyumunun gerekli olmakla birlikte yeterli olmadığı, en alt lig düzeyindeki takımlarda yüksek sosyal uyumun başarısızlığa neden olabileceği ve erkeklerin kazanmak için kadınlardan daha fazla görev uyumu sergiledikleri belirlenmiştir.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2014 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Hentbol · 2. Lig · başarı sıralaması

Özet

Çalışma aynı lig düzeyinde (2. lig) rekabetçi hentbol takımlarının, takım/grup uyumu (group cohesion) düzeyine göre başarı sıralamasını değerlendirmek ve takım uyumu ile başarı sıralaması arasındaki ilişkiyi belirlemek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Takım uyumu Carron ve ark. (1985) tarafından geliştirilen, Türk sporcularına Unutmaz ve ark (2014) tarafından uyarlanan Takım Birlikteliği Envanteri (Group Environment Questinnaire-GEQ) ile belirlenmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda, müsabakada 1. olan takımlar ile diğer takımların görev uyumu düzeyi benzerdir. Müsabakayı 1. ve 2. olarak tamamlayan takımların sosyal uyum düzeyleri en düşük, sonuncu olarak tamamlayan takımların en yüksektir. Erkek takımlarının görev uyumu düzeyi kadın takımlarından yüksektir. Ayrıca sosyal uyum ile takım başarısı arasında, görev uyumu ile cinsiyet arasında ilişki belirlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak takımların başarılı sıralamasında üst noktalara çıkmaları için görev uyumunun gerekli olmakla birlikte yeterli olmadığı, en alt lig düzeyindeki takımlarda yüksek sosyal uyumun başarısızlığa neden olabileceği ve erkeklerin kazanmak için kadınlardan daha fazla görev uyumu sergiledikleri belirlenmiştir.

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to evaluate the success ranking of competitive handball teams at the same league level (2nd league) according to the group cohesion level and to determine the relationship between success ranking and group cohesion. Group cohesion was determined according to the Team Environment Questinnaire (GEQ), which was developed by Carron et al. (1985), and adapted to Turkish athletes by Unutmaz et al. (2011). As a result of the research, task cohesion levels of the teams that came first in the competition and the other teams are similar. The task cohesion level of men's teams is higher than women's teams. In addition, the relationship between social cohesion and team success, and between task cohesion and gender were analyzed. As a result, it has been concluded that although task cohesion is necessary, it is not enough to achieve top positions, high social cohesion in the teams in the lowest league may cause failure and men exhibit more task cohesion than women in order to win.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Özdemir, İ., Sevilmiş, A. (2021). Takım Uyumu ve Takım Başarısı Arasındaki İlişki: Üniversite Hentbol 2. Lig Takımları Örneği. Akdeniz Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 2, 193–209. https://doi.org/10.38021/asbid.904958

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (54)

  1. Bakeman, R., & Helmreich, R. (1975). Cohesiveness and performance: Covariation and causality in an undersea environment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11(5), 478-489. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(75)90050-5.
  2. Beal, D. J., Cohen, R. R., Burke, M. J., & McLendon, C. L. (2003). Cohesion and performance in groups: a meta-analytic clarification of construct relations. Journal of applied psychology, 88 (6), 989-1004. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.989.
  3. Boone, K. S., Beitel, P., & Kuhlman, J. (1997). The effects of the win/loss record on cohesion. Journal of Sport Behavior, 20(2), 125-134. https://search.proquest.com/openview/0f5ea4b7b937c654d13179ba15623a88/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=30153
  4. Brawley, L. R., Carron, A. V., & Widmeyer, W. N. (1987). Assessing the cohesion of teams: Validity of the Group Environment Questionnaire. Journal of Sport Exercise Psychology, 9(3), 275-294. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1123/jsp.9.3.275
  5. Bray, C. D., & Whaley, D. E. (2001). Team cohesion, effort, and objective individual performance of high school basketball players. The Sport Psychologist, 15(3), 260-275. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.15.3.260
  6. Carron, A. V., & Ball, J. R. (1977). An analysis of the cause-effect characteristics of cohesiveness and participation motivation in intercollegiate hockey. International Review of Sport Sociology, 12(2), 49-60. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/101269027701200203
  7. Carron, A. V., & Brawley, L. R. (2000). Cohesion: Conceptual and measurement issues. Small group research, 31(1), 89-106. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/104649640003100105
  8. Carron, A. V., Bray, S. R., & Eys, M. A. (2002a). Team cohesion and team success in sport. Journal of sports sciences, 20(2), 119-126. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/026404102317200828
  9. Carron, A. V., & Chelladurai, P. (1981). Cohesiveness as a factor in sport performance. International Review of Sport Sociology, 16(2), 21-43. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/101269028101600202
  10. Carron, A. V., Colman, M. M., Wheeler, J., & Stevens, D. (2002b). Cohesion and performance in sport: A meta analysis. Journal of Sport Exercise Psychology, 24(2), 168-188. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.24.2.168
  11. Carron, A. V., Widmeyer, W. N., & Brawley, L. R. (1985). The development of an instrument to assess cohesion in sport teams: The Group Environment Questionnaire. Journal of Sport Exercise Psychology, 7(3), 244-266. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1123/jsp.7.3.244
  12. Charbonneau, D., & Wood, V. M. (2018). Antecedents and outcomes of unit cohesion and affective commitment to the Army. Military Psychology, 30(1), 43-53. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/08995605.2017.1420974
  13. Davids, K., & Nutter, A. (1988). The cohesion-performance relationship of English national league volleyball teams. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 15(5), 205-213. Dorak, F., & Vurgun, N. (2006). Takım sporları açısından empati ve takım birlikteliği ilişkisi. Spormetre Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(2), 73-77. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1501/Sporm_0000000060
  14. Dyaram, L., & Kamalanabhan, T. (2005). Unearthed: the other side of group cohesiveness. Journal of Social Sciences, 10(3), 185-190. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09718923.2005.11892479
  15. Evans, C. R., & Dion, K. L. (1991). Group cohesion and performance: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 22(2), 175-186. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496491222002
  16. Eys, M. A., & Carron, A. V. (2001). Role ambiguity, task cohesion, and task self-efficacy. Small Group Research, 32(3), 356-373. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/104649640103200305
  17. Gardner, D. E., Shields, D. L. L., Bredemeier, B. J. L., & Bostrom, A. (1996). The relationship between perceived coaching behaviors and team cohesion among baseball and softball players. The Sport Psychologist, 10(4), 367-381. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.10.4.367
  18. Gioldasis, A., Stavrou, N., Mitrotasios, M., & Psychountaki, M. (2016). Cohesion and performance in soccer: A causal model. Sport Science Review, 25(1-2), 97. https://doi.org/10.1515/ssr-2016-0006
  19. Hardy, J., Eys, M. A., & Carron, A. V. (2005). Exploring the potential disadvantages of high cohesion in sports teams. Small Group Research, 36(2), 166-187. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496404266715
  20. Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., & Bell, M. P. (1998). Beyond relational demography: Time and the effects of surface-and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 96-107. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/256901
  21. Hatem, Ö., & Aydın, O. (2009). Spor takımlarında kolektif yeterlik, öz-yeterlik ve saygınlık algıları ile başarı algı ve beklentileri arasındaki ilişkiler. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 26(2)
  22. Heuzé, J.-P., Bosselut, G., & Thomas, J.-P. (2007). Should the coaches of elite female handball teams focus on collective efficacy or group cohesion? The Sport Psychologist, 21(4), 383-399. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.21.4.383
  23. Heuzé, J.-P., Raimbault, N., & Fontayne, P. (2006a). Relationships between cohesion, collective efficacy and performance in professional basketball teams: An examination of mediating effects. Journal of sports sciences, 24(1), 59-68. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410500127736
  24. Heuzé, J.-P., Sarrazin, P., Masiero, M., Raimbault, N., & Thomas, J.-P. (2006b). The relationships of perceived motivational climate to cohesion and collective efficacy in elite female teams. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 18(3), 201-218. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200600830273
  25. Høigaard, R., Säfvenbom, R., & Tønnessen, F. E. (2006). The relationship between group cohesion, group norms, and perceived social loafing in soccer teams. Small Group Research, 37(3), 217-232. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496406287311
  26. Hoyle, R. H., & Crawford, A. M. (1994). Use of individual-level data to investigate group phenomena issues and strategies. Small Group Research, 25(4), 464-485. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496494254003
  27. Jordan, M. BrainyQuote.com.Available:https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/michael_jordan_167383. Accessed April 8, 2020.
  28. Akpınar, S., Kirazcı, S. ve Aşçı, H. (2011). Group cohesion in exercise classes: An examination of gender and type of exercise class differences. Journal of Human Sciences, 8(2), 845-862.
  29. Kocaekşi, S., & Koruç, Z. (2012). Başarılı ve başarısız hentbol takımlarının grup sargınlığı, kaygı, güdülenme ve yeterlik düzeylerinin karşılaştırılması. Hacettepe J. of Sport Sciences, 23(3), 129-143.
  30. Kozachuk, J., Foroughi, C. K., & Freeman, G. (2016). Exploring electronic sports: An interdisciplinary approach. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 60(1), 2118-2122. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931213601479
  31. Kozub, S. A., & Button, C. J. (2000). The influence of a competitive outcome on perceptions of cohesion in rugby and swimming teams. International Journal of Sport Psychology. 31 (1), 82–95.
  32. Landers, D. M., & Lüschen, G. (1974). Team performance outcome and the cohesiveness of competitive coacting groups. International Review of Sport Sociology, 9(2), 57-71. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/101269027400900203
  33. Langfred, C. W. (1998). Is group cohesiveness a double-edged sword? An investigation of the effects of cohesiveness on performance. Small Group Research, 29(1), 124-143. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496498291005
  34. Light Shields, D. L., Gardner, D. E., Light Bredemeier, B. J., & Bostro, A. (1997). The relationship between leadership behaviors and group cohesion in team sports. The Journal of Psychology, 131(2), 196-210. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00223989709601964
  35. Mach, M., Dolan, S., & Tzafrir, S. (2010). The differential effect of team members' trust on team performance: The mediation role of team cohesion. Journal of Occupational Organizational Psychology, 83(3), 771-794. https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.1348/096317909X473903 Marcos, F. M. L., Miguel, P. A. S., Oliva, D. S., & Calvo, T. G. (2010). Interactive effects of team cohesion on perceived efficacy in semi-professional sport. Journal of sports science medicine, 9(2), 320-325.
  36. Marcos, F. M. L., Sánchez-Miguel, P. A., Sánchez-Oliva, D., Alonso, D. A., & García-Calvo, T. (2012). Evolution of perceived cohesion and efficacy over the season and their relation to success expectations in soccer teams. Journal of Human Kinetics, 34(1), 129-138. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2478/v10078-012-0072-y
  37. Matheson, H., Mathes, S., & Murray, M. (1997). The effect of winning and losing on female interactive and coactive team cohesion. Journal of Sport Behavior, 20(3), 284-298.
  38. McGrath, J. E. (1962). The influence of positive interpersonal relations on adjustment and effectiveness in rifle teams. The Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 65(6), 365–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0047395
  39. Mullen, B., & Copper, C. (1994). The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological bulletin, 115(2), 210–227. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.115.2.210
  40. Narimani, M., & Ahari, S. (2008). A study of the relationship between team cohesion, role ambiguity and athletic performance in football team players. Research Journal of Biological Sciences, 3(1), 47-51. https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/20083111722 Pain, M. A., & Harwood, C. G. (2008). The performance environment of the England youth soccer teams: A quantitative investigation. Journal of Sports Sciences, 26(11), 1157-1169. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410802101835
  41. Paskevich, D. M., Brawley, L. R., Dorsch, K. D., & Widmeyer, W. N. (1999). Relationship between collective efficacy and team cohesion: Conceptual and measurement issues. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, Practice, 3(3), 210. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.3.3.210
  42. Pescosolido, A. T., & Saavedra, R. (2012). Cohesion and sports teams: A review. Small Group Research, 43(6), 744-758. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496412465020
  43. Rusu, O. (2020). The Evaluation of Cohesion in the Sports Groups within a Romanian City. Physical Culture Sport. Studies Research, 85(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2478/pcssr-2020-0001
  44. Salminen, S., & Luhtanen, P. (1998). Cohesion predicts success in junior ice hockey. Perceptual Motor Skills, 87(2), 649-650. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1998.87.2.649
  45. Shaw, M. E. (1981). Group dynamics. New York. McGraw-Hill.
  46. Slater, M., & Sewell, D. (1994). An examination of the cohesion‐performance relationship in university hockey teams. Journal of Sports Sciences, 12(5), 423-431. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/02640419408732192
  47. Soyer, F., Can, Y., Güven, H., Hergüner, G., Bayansalduz, M., & Tetik, B. (2010). Sporculardaki başarı motivasyonu ile takım birlikteliği arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(1), 225-239.
  48. Spink, K. S., & Carron, A. V. (1993). The effects of team building on the adherence patterns of female exercise participants. Journal of Sport Exercise Psychology, 15(1), 39-49. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.15.1.39
  49. Tziner, A., Nicola, N., & Rizac, A. (2003). Relation between social cohesion and team performance in soccer teams. Perceptual Motor Skills, 96(1), 145-148. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.2003.96.1.145
  50. Unutmaz, V., Kiremitci, O., & Gencer, R. T. (2011). Takım Birlikteliği Envanteri’nin Psikometrik Özelliklerinin İncelenmesi. CBÜ Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(2), 23-30. Widmeyer, W. N., & Martens, R. (1978). When cohesion predicts performance outcome in sport. Research Quarterly. American Alliance for Health, Physical Education Recreation, 49(3), 372-380. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/10671315.1978.10615547
  51. Williams, J. M., & Hacker, C. M. (1982). Causal relationships among cohesion, satisfaction, and performance in women's intercollegiate field hockey teams. Journal of Sport Exercise Psychology, 4(4), 324-337. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1123/jsp.4.4.324
  52. Williams, J. M., & Widmeyer, W. N. (1991). The Cohesion-Performance Outcome Relationship in a Coactlng Sport. Journal of Sport Exercise Psychology, 13(4), 364-371. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.13.4.364
  53. Wise, S. (2014). Can a team have too much cohesion? The dark side to network density. European Management Journal, 32(5), 703-711. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2013.12.005
  54. Wolfe, R. A., Weick, K. E., Usher, J. M., Terborg, J. R., Poppo, L., Murrell, A. J., Dukerich, J. M., Core, D. C., Dickson, K. E., & Jourdan, J. S. (2005). Sport and organizational studies: Exploring synergy. Journal of Management Inquiry, 14(2), 182-210. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492605275245