不同中文版本的教練—選手關係量表的實用性研究

競技與健身運動心理學理論大都源自於西方文化的背景發展而來。為了能夠提昇相關研究理論的推論性，必須將西方文化中發展而成的理論架構，應用於不同文化背景（例如臺灣）中，而教練—選手關係的理論架構，也沒有例外。因此，選擇或修訂量表的中文版本，以突破文化上差異，同時延伸理論架構的主張，遂成為國內運動心理學者，面臨挑戰時的首要工作。本研究目的在於比較兩種不同版本的中文化教練—選手關係量表的實用性。以國內269位男子籃球選手為對象（平均年齡為16.88歲，標準差為2.36歲），經教練與選手同意後，進行包括不同版本的教練-選手關係量表和團隊凝聚力量表等問卷調查的方式，完成資料蒐集工作。研究結果發現，以探索性因素分析及階層迴歸分析的統計分析策略，進行資料處理，發現不同版本的量表，在建構效度及同時效度，各具優缺點。依據結果，本研究建議，研究者在選用教練—選手關係量表，可根據不同研究目的，以及量表的信度、建構效度與同時效度做為標準，選擇適合之量表。

關鍵字

親密性；承諾感；互補性；探索性因素分析；同時效度

並列摘要

The advantage of conducting cross-cultural study is to extend theoretical frameworks and its generalizability into a broader population. Without any exception, researchers have to take measure tools into consideration with both theoretical and psychometric properties in mind. Sport psychology scholars in Taiwan must face the challenge which most of the theories developed in sport and exercise psychology were created in western countries. Therefore, choice or modify scales into Chinese without the cultural boundaries would become the priority. Aim of the present study was to compare the utilities of two different version of Chinese Coach-Athlete Relationship Scale (CCRS) in factorial as well as concurrent validity. Two hundred and sixty-nine male basketball players (mean age=16.88, SD=2.36) were involved in the present study. Exploratory factor analyses were conducted in two different version of CCRS and hierarchical regressions with each of the sub-dimension of CCRS were entered in two steps in order to predict group cohesion subscales. Advantage and disadvantage of different version of CCRS were respectively discussed and future suggestions were proposed.