1949
DOI: 10.1080/10671188.1949.10621039
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Factor Analysis of Motor Learning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1956
1956
1993
1993

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Through the use of mathematical clustering techniques (e.g., factor analysis), the resulting clusters are used to define the functional abilities common to the tests. Examples of earlier studies include Bass (1939) ;Brogden, Burke, and Lubin (1952); Carpenter (1941); Cousins (1955); Cumbee and Harris (1953); Cumbee, Myer, and Peterson (1957); Cureton (1947) ;Fleishman, Kremer, and Shoup (1961) ;Fleishman, Thomas, and Munroe (1961); Hempel and Fleishman (1 955); Henry (1 960); Highmore (1 956); Ismail and Cowell (1 96 1); Larson (1940Larson ( ,1941; McCloy (1956); McCraw (1949); Metheny (1938);Phillips (1949); Rarick (1937); Seashore (1942); Sills (1950).…”
Section: Myers Gebhardt Crump Fleishmanmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Through the use of mathematical clustering techniques (e.g., factor analysis), the resulting clusters are used to define the functional abilities common to the tests. Examples of earlier studies include Bass (1939) ;Brogden, Burke, and Lubin (1952); Carpenter (1941); Cousins (1955); Cumbee and Harris (1953); Cumbee, Myer, and Peterson (1957); Cureton (1947) ;Fleishman, Kremer, and Shoup (1961) ;Fleishman, Thomas, and Munroe (1961); Hempel and Fleishman (1 955); Henry (1 960); Highmore (1 956); Ismail and Cowell (1 96 1); Larson (1940Larson ( ,1941; McCloy (1956); McCraw (1949); Metheny (1938);Phillips (1949); Rarick (1937); Seashore (1942); Sills (1950).…”
Section: Myers Gebhardt Crump Fleishmanmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…One obvious method to avoid the dilemma is to use some kind of percentage score in order to relate learning to performance level. While this method has received considerable use (7,8 ) , it has been severely criticized by Woodrow (11) …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While investigations of tests of physical performance have identified factors unique to agility tests (2, 3, 5 , 7. 8, 12, IS), others have found factors of speed and strength but have failed to identify the factor of agility (1,4,6,9,10,11,13,14). The conflicting results could be explained by the hypothesis that the variance in the performance of agility tests was primarily the result of an interaction of speed and strength.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 72%