The use of instruments for the evaluation of a player’s procedural tactical knowledge (PTK) in sociomotor sports, such as football, is a line of research of growing interest since it allows a pertinent description of the player’s football competence. The aim of this study is to configure and validate an ad-hoc observational tool that allows evaluating the player’s PTK, understood as football competence, from the observation, coding and recording of the roles, the actions of the acquired subroles and the operational and specific principles of football in the attack and defense phases. Based on the Delphi method, a field format coding instrument was designed and validated where each criterion is a system of categories, exhaustive and mutually exclusive. The results showed excellent content validity (9.02 out of 10), and high values of intra-observer stability (k = 0.747) and inter-observer agreement (k = 0.665). Generalizability analysis showed an excellent reliability (G = 0.99). Additionally, the construct validity of the tool was calculated through a small-sided game Gk + 4v4 + Gk, using two independent samples: semi-professional and amateur players. The results reflected significant differences (α < 0.05) between both samples in the variables total score, offensive score and defensive score. Therefore, this study provides a valid and reliable instrument that allows data collection in a rigorous and pertinent way, as well as their analysis and evaluation in attack and defense according to the roles of the players and based on the motor behaviors that they perform using the subroles that they acquired, associated with the technical dimension, along with the principles that they develop in parallel, in support of the tactical dimension.
In the last two decades, the analysis of tactical knowledge has become a research channel of increasing interest, contributing to the development of ad-hoc tools to carry out this task. The aim of this study is to collect evaluation tools which allow to measure the declarative tactical knowledge (DTK) in soccer. Five databases (Web of Sciences, Pub Med, SportDiscus, Psycinfo and Eric) were used for the literature search based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, according to five inclusion/exclusion criteria: (i) tools that determinate DTK in soccer players, (ii) come from primary sources, that is, published for the first time, (iii) show game-play scenarios in video sequences or static images via questionnaires, (iv) have been submitted to a process of validity and reliability, (v) and avoid the use of verbal language. Nine tools were selected and analyzed in this systematic review: Soccer decision-making tests (McMorris, in Percept Mot Ski 85(2):467, 1997), Protocol for the evaluation of declarative tactical knowledge (Mangas, in Conhecimento declarativo no futebol: Estudo comparativo em praticantes federados e não-federados, do escalão de sub-14, Dissertação de Mestrado, Faculdade de Desporto da Universidade do Porto, 1999), Questionnaire for the evaluation of tactical comprehension applied to football—CECTAF—(De la Vega, in Cultura, Ciencia y Deporte, 2002. https://repositorio.uam.es/bitstream/handle/10486/1723/11535_vega_marcos_ricardodela.pdf?sequence=1), Decision making instrument for Soccer (Fontana, in The development of a decision making instrument for soccer, Master’s degree dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 2004. http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/10124/), Game Understanding Test (Blomqvist et al., in Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy 10(2):107–119, 2005), Offensive Football Tactical Knowledge Test—TCTOF—(Serra-Olivares and García-López, in Revista Internacional De Medicina y Ciencias De La Actividad Física y Del Deporte 16(63):521–536, 2016. https://doi.org/10.15366/rimcafd2016.63.008), Video-based decision-making test (Keller et al., in Int J Sports Sci Coach 13(6):1057–1066, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747954118760778), Decision-Making form IOS application (Bennett et al., in J Sci Med Sport 22(6):729–734, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2018.12.011) and TacticUP video test for soccer (Machado and Teoldo, in Front Psychol, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01690). Most of the tools did not pass many of the criteria proposed to assess their quality. Fundamentally, it can be concluded that few tools show specific tactical scores based on game principles or subroles that allow identifying possible points of improvement in the knowledge that players have on specific aspects of the game. For this reason, and based on the other findings found in this review, future studies should consider: (i) the importance of designing tools that reflect scores based on tactical principles and game subroles; (ii) the advantages and disadvantages of designing tools based on static images or video sequences; (iii) the need to design tools that can access the DTK of young children; (iv) the requirement to design tools that present game-play scenarios in the first person; (v) the essentiality of facing the tools designed to rigorous processes of validity and reliability.
This study aimed to analyze the game context of the same task (a reduced game P+4 vs. 4+P) in two groups (8 semi-professionals and 8 amateurs), comparing the procedural tactical knowledge of the players. 1377 tactical behaviors were analyzed through the Football Competition Observation System (FOCOS), evaluating the volume and efficiency of 67 variables. Student's t-test for independent samples and Cohen's d effect size were calculated. Using the Bonferroni correction to control for the family error rate in each criterion of the observation tool, significant differences were found in 13 variables (volume, n = 1; efficiency, n = 12), with the following sizes of effect (very large = 4; large = 9). The results revealed that game contexts differ mainly in the efficiency of tactical behaviors that take place outside the game center. Based on this finding, variables focused on the relationship with the ball, widely used to assess performance in team sports, must be carefully judged when comparing players from different divisions and categories; and coaches must prioritize their attention on what happens away from the ball, instead of focusing feedback on those tactical behaviors that occur in the heat of the action.Keywords: performance, decision making, comparative analysis, observational methodology, reduced games
This study aimed to design and validate a multi-response test with images of football game-play situations to evaluate the player's declarative tactical knowledge (DTK). “TesTactico for F7” (seven-a-side football) is made up of 62 game-play situations related to the criteria (phases, roles, actions of the acquired subroles, operational and core/specific principles) of the Football Competence Observation System (FOCOS), analysing a total of 67 variables. The content validity coefficient (9.63 out of 10) was estimated via expert group (n=13), calculating the averages of the degree of agreement and acceptance of the experts. The construct validity was calculated using Student's T-test for independent samples. 155 young football players participated according to their football competence (high-level=80; low-level=75). The post-hoc sample size calculation using G*Power revealed .93 of power (d=0.5, p=0.5). Bonferroni correction was used to control the family-wise error rate in each criterion. The results reflected that the high-level group was better in the 67 variables, with significant differences (p ≤ .008) in 38 of them. Cohen’s d-effect size was also calculated to assess the magnitude of the difference between both groups, which were large (d = 1.38) for the Total Average. The reliability of the tool was determined at the inter-observer level using the Fleiss kappa index of concordance (k = .882), and at the intra-observer level through the test-retest method using the Cohen kappa index (k = 1.000). Internal consistency was estimated through Cronbach's alpha coefficient (α = .925). The generalizability analysis also showed excellent reliability (G = .985) and perfect representativeness (r2 = 1.00), showing that the variability is explained by the game-play situations that make up the test. It is concluded that the instrument shows optimal validity and reliability values. Este estudio tuvo como objetivo diseñar y validar una prueba de respuesta múltiple con imágenes de situaciones de juego del fútbol para evaluar el conocimiento táctico declarativo (CTD) del jugador. “TesTactico para F7” (fútbol-7) está compuesto por 62 situaciones de juego relacionadas con los criterios (fases, roles, acciones de los subroles adquiridos, principios operacionales y fundamentales/específicos) del Sistema de Observación de la Competencia Futbolística (FOCOS), analizando 67 variables. El coeficiente de validez de contenido (9.63/10) se estimó mediante grupo de expertos (n=13), calculando grado de acuerdo y aceptación. La validez de constructo se calculó mediante la prueba T-Student para muestras independientes. Participaron 155 jóvenes futbolistas organizados según su competencia futbolística (alta=80; baja=75). El cálculo del tamaño de la muestra post-hoc usando G*Power reveló .93 de poder (d=0.5, p=0.5). Se utilizó la corrección de Bonferroni para controlar la tasa de error familiar en cada criterio. Los resultados reflejaron que el grupo de alto nivel fue mejor en las 67 variables, con diferencias significativas (p ≤ .008) en 38 de ellas. También se calculó el tamaño del efecto d-Cohen para evaluar la magnitud de diferencias que fueron grandes (d = 1.38) para el Promedio Total. La fiabilidad de la herramienta se determinó a nivel inter-observador mediante el índice de concordancia kappa de Fleiss (k = .882), y a nivel intra-observador mediante el método test-retest utilizando kappa de Cohen (k = 1.000). La consistencia interna fue estimada a través del coeficiente alfa de Cronbach (α = .925). El análisis de generalizabilidad mostró también una excelente fiabilidad (G =.985) y una representatividad perfecta (r2 = 1.00), evidenciándose que la variabilidad es explicada por las situaciones de juego que componen el test. Se concluye que el instrumento presenta valores óptimos de validez y confiabilidad. Este estudo teve como objetivo validar um teste de múltipla escolha com imagens de situações de jogo de futebol para avaliar o conhecimento tático declarativo (CTD) do jogador. O "TesTactico F7" (futebol-7) é composto por 62 situações de jogo relacionadas com os critérios do Sistema de Observação da Competência Futebolística (FOCOS) , analisando 67 variáveis. O coeficiente de validade de conteúdo (9,63/10) foi estimado por um grupo de especialistas (n=13), calculando o grau de concordância e aceitação. A validade de construto foi calculada usando a T-Student para amostras independentes. Participaram 155 jovens jogadores de futebol, organizados de acordo com sua competência futebolística (alta=80; baixa=75). O cálculo do tamanho da amostra post-hoc usando G*Power revelou poder de 0.93 (d=0.5, p=0.5). A correção de Bonferroni foi usada para controlar a taxa de erro em cada critério. Os resultados mostraram que o grupo de alto nível foi melhor nas 67 variáveis, com diferenças significativas (p ≤ .008) em 38 delas. O tamanho do efeito d-Cohen também foi calculado para avaliar a magnitude das diferenças entre os dois grupos, que foram grandes (d = 1.38) para o Escore Total. A confiabilidade do instrumento foi determinada no nível interobservador pelo índice de concordância Fleiss kappa (k = .882), e no nível intraobservador pelo método teste-reteste usando o kappa de Cohen (k = 1.000). A consistência interna foi estimada por meio do coeficiente alfa de Cronbach (α = 0,925). A análise de generalização também apresentou excelente confiabilidade (G = .985) e representatividade perfeita (r2 = 1.00), mostrando que a variabilidade é explicada pelas situações de jogo que compõem o teste. Conclui-se que o instrumento apresenta valores ótimos de validade e confiabilidade.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.