INFLUENCE OF GAMES & SPORTS ON GROUP COHESION DEVELOPMENT AMONG MALE INDIAN ATHLETES

Autori

  • Sandeep Deswal Research Scholar, Department of Physical Education and Sports, Central University of Haryana, Mahendragarh, Haryana, India
  • Ravinder Pal Ahlawat Professor, Dr., Department of Physical Education and Sports, Central University of Haryana, Mahendragarh, Haryana, India

##semicolon##

https://doi.org/10.46827/ejpe.v12i6.6055

##semicolon##

group cohesion##common.commaListSeparator## sports achievement##common.commaListSeparator## individual attractions##common.commaListSeparator## group integration##common.commaListSeparator## group environment

Abstrakt

Objective: The objective of the study is to find out the influence of games & sports on group cohesion development among male Indian athletes. Methodology: For the purpose of the study, 100 sportsmen and 100 non-sportsmen boys were randomly selected. The age of all the subjects ranges from 18 yrs. to 22 yrs. The Group Environment Questionnaire (GEQ) developed by Albert V. Carron, was used to assess the group cohesion skills of the subjects. Descriptive statistics was used to examine the significance difference among four domains of Group Cohesion (A- Individual Attractions to the Group-Social (ATGS), B- Individual Attractions to the Group-Task (ATGT), C- Group Integration-Social (GIS), D- Group Integration-Task (GIT)). One-way ANOVA was used, and the hypothesis was tested at a .05 level of significance. Results: The mean and standard deviation of non-playing boys are A- Individual Attractions to the Group-Social (ATGS) (31.02 +4.16), B- Individual Attractions to the Group-Task (ATGT) (29.20+6.17), C- Group Integration-Social (GIS) (27.22+5.64), D- Group Integration-Task (GIT) (34.16+8.26) and Total Group Environment Questionnaire (GEQ) Scale is (121.70 +17.26). Mean and standard deviation of players in different games and sports are A- Individual Attractions to the Group-Social (ATGS) (41.82 +2.54), B- Individual Attractions to the Group-Task (ATGT) (31.20+4.32), C- Group Integration-Social (GIS) (29.38+4.99), D- Group Integration-Task (GIT) (40.32+5.26) and Total Group Environment Questionnaire (GEQ) Scale is (142.72 +12.32). The ANOVA result shows that the “p-values” of the domains of the Group Environment Questionnaire (GEQ) Scale is less than 0.05 and hence the F-value is significant at 5% level. Conclusion: Results clearly indicates that there is a significant difference existing between the group cohesion and sports achievements of college boys. Students who are high on the GEQ Scale are having high sports achievement hence group cohesion plays major role in sports achievements among male students. Development of group cohesion among player’s leads to better sports performance.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter

##submission.citations##

A. V. Carron, Cohesiveness in Sports Groups: Interpretations and Considerations, Journal of Sports Psychology, Vol.. 4, (March, 1982);12

Bal, B.S., Singh, K., Sood, M., & Kumar, S. (2011). Emotional Intelligence and sporting performance: A comparison between open and closed skill athletes. Journal of Physical Education and Sports Management, 2(5), 48-52

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, 989-1004.

Beal, D. J., R. R. Cohen, M. J. Burke, and C. L. McLendon. 2003. Cohesion and Performance in Groups: A Meta-Analytic Clarification of Construct Relations. Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (6): 989–1004. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.989.

Cameron, Antonia, Frances Blanchette, Glenda Francis, Christina Fuentes, and Mayra Rivera-Deliz. 2012. The role of communities of practice in developing teacher leadership. The NCTM Yearbook of Professional Learning Communities. Reston, VA: NCTM.

Carron A. V., Brawley L. R. (2000). Cohesion: Conceptual and measurement issues. Small Group Research, 31, 89-106.

Chang, Y.-Y. (2016). High-performance work systems, joint impact of transformational leadership, an empowerment climate and organizational ambidexterity. J. Organ. Chang. Manag. 29, 424–444. doi: 10.1108/JOCM-09-2015-0150

Charry, K. (2012). Leadership Theories - 8 Major Leadership Theories. Retrieved March 23, 2014 from http://psychology.about.com/od/leadership/p/leadtheories.htm

Coggins, C., & McGovern, K. (2014). Five goals for teacher leadership. Phi Delta Kappan, 95 (7), 15–21.

Dion, K. L. 2000. Group Cohesion: From "Field of Forces" to Multidimensional Construct. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice 4 (1): 7–26. doi:10.1037/1089-2699.4.1.7.

Eddy, P. L. (2012). Community College Leadership: A Multidimensional Model for Leading Change. Stylus Publishing, LLC.

Evans C. R., Dion K. L. (1991). Group cohesion and performance: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 22, 175-186.

F. Miguel Tobal, R. Maria Navlet Salvatierra and D. Maria Diaz Martin, Anxiety Levels in Different Sports Modalities, Completeness de Madrid, Faulted de Medicina, Vol 7/1, (2001):57-58.

G. Parfitt and J. Pates, The Effects of Cognitive and Somatic Anxiety and Self-Confidence on Components of Performance During Competition, Journal of Sports and Exercise Psychology, Vol.. 22/1 (2000):110

Gill, D.L. (1986) Psychological dynamics of sports, USA: Human Kinetics, p. 31-33.

Gill, D.L. (1986). A prospective view of the Journal of Sport (and Exercise) Psychology. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 8, 164-173.

Goodnight, R. (2011). Laissez-Faire Leadership. Encyclopedia of Leadership. London, UK: Sage Publications.

Goyat, M. A Comparative Study of Rural and Urban Sports Women in Relation to attitude towards Sports with Special Reference of Haryana. (Unpublished PhD Thesis, Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, 2005)

Greer L. L., Caruso H. M., Jehn K. A. (2011). The bigger they are, the harder they fall: Linking team power, conflict, congruence, and team performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116, 116–128.

Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. (2001). The Dynamic Nature of Conflict: A Longitudinal Study of Intragroup Conflict and Group Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 238–251. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069453

Kinzer, C.J.; Rincon, M.; Ward, J.; Rincon, R.; & Gomez, L. (2014) Teacher leaders Advancing Mathematics Learning. Teaching Children Mathematics 20 (6):384-391.

Man, D. C., & Lam, S. S. K. (2003). The effects of job complexity and autonomy on cohesiveness in collectivistic and individualistic work groups: A cross-cultural analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(8), 979–1001. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.227

Maxwell, J. C. (2013). Right to Lead: Learning Leadership through Character and Courage. Sourcebooks, Inc.

Mullen, B. and Copper, C. (1994). The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: an integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 210-227.

Mullen, B., and C. Copper. 1994. The Relation between Group Cohesiveness and Performance: An Integration. Psychological Bulletin 115 (2): 210–227. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.2.210.

Mullins, L. J. (2005). Management and Organizational Behavior. London: FT Pitman.

Mulvihill, C.; River, K. and Aggleton, P., View of Young People towards Physical Activity: Determinants and Barriers to Involvement. Health education, (2000b), Vol. 100(5): 190-199

Mutonyi BR, Slatten T, Lien G. Fostering innovative behavior in health organizations: a PLS-SEM analysis of Norwegian hospital employees, BMC Health Serv Res. 2021:21(1):470

Naicker SR & Mestry R (2011) Distributive leadership in public schools: Experiences and perceptions of teachers in the Soweto region. Perspectives in Education, 29:99-108.

Nibler, R., & Harris, K. L. (2003). The Effects of Culture and Cohesiveness on Intragroup Conflict and Effectiveness. The Journal of Social Psychology, 143(5), 613–631. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540309598467

Nolan, B., & Palazzolo, L. (2011). New teacher perceptions of the ‘teacher leader’

movement. NASSP Bulletin, 95(4), 302-318.

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sage Publications.

Pescosolido T. (2012). Cohesion and sports teams: A review. Small Group Research, 43.

Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531-544.

Rebore, R. W. (2011). The Essentials of Human Resources Administration in Education. Pearson Higher Education.

Reynolds, B. (2010). Principles to Enable Leaders to Navigate the Harsh Realities of Crisis and Risk Communication. Journal of Business Continuity & Emergency Planning, 4, 262-273

Rodríguez-bailón R., Moya M., Yzerbyt V. Y. (2000). Why do superiors attend to negative stereotypic information about their subordinates? Effects of power legitimacy on social perception. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 651–672.

Scherder, J.; Thomis, M.; Vanreusel, B.; Lefevre, J.; Renson, R.; Vanden Eynde, B. and Beunen, G.P. ‘Sports Participation among Females from Adolescence to adulthood’ International Review for the Sociology of Sports, (2006) Vol.41(3-4):413-430

Schermerhorn, J.R., Hunt, J.G. & Osborn, R.N. (2003). Organizational Behavior (8th ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Schutle, VX. Malonff, JM., Hajj, LE. Hagger, DJ. Coopyr, JL, CJ. Dorahei, L., (1998) Psychological Review. 25.pp. 167-77.m

Solis, F., Kupczynski, L., & Mundy, M.-A. (2011). A Profile of Faculty Leadership Behavior at One South Texas Community College. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 6, 1-17.

Verma J.P. (2013). Data Analysis in Management with SPSS Software, Springer publications.

Verma, M. A Study of Parental Influence and Women Sports Participation in Haryana. A Hanuman Vyayam Parsarak Mandal (2007), Vol.40(3):12-16

Wolinski, S. (2010). Leadership Theories. Retrieved June 14, 2014, from http://managementhelp.org/blogs/leadership/2010/04/21/leadership-theories/

##submission.downloads##

Publikované

2025-06-05

Číslo

Diel 12 Číslo 6 (2025)

Sekcia

Articles

##submission.license##

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

 

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).