This paper represents the findings of a larger study which highlights the relationship between cohesion and the performance among hockey players of Pakistan in view of socio-interactional context. Pakistan won laurels in Field hockey with four World Cup and three Olympics titles to its credit but no effort has been made to find out the factors which have turned Pakistan (as a team) from the status of a giant into a pygmy during the last two decades. The foremost objective of this paper is to scrutinize the relationship between cohesion and playersâ€™ performance. A sample of 296 players from 14sport departments was chosen as respondents. Adopted questionnaire was used to collect the survey data. The findings highlighted the significant (p=.001) relationship between cohesion and playersâ€™ performance. It is concluded that the cohesiveness among players is to be developed and expanded regarding playersâ€™ performance to fulfil sport requirements. Recommendations have been made to raise the excellence, relevance, and legitimacy in team regarding cohesion with playersâ€™ performance

Ahmad, Mukhtar

Javed, Saeed

Naseer, Abida

Rahim, Abd

Shariff, Muhammad

Sheraz, Muhammad Irfan

English

Sarhad University of Science & Information Technology (SUIT), Peshawar: E-Journals

  Vol.2, Issue 1, 2017                                                          THE SPARK  19  THE RELATIONSHIP STUDY BETWEEN COHESION AND PERFORMANCEOF PLAYERS OF HOCKEY, IN PAKISTAN 1Saeed Javed*, 2Abida Naseer, 2Abd Rahim MohdShariff, 3Muhammad IrfanSheraz, 1Mukhtar Ahmad    Abstract This paper represents the findings of a larger study which highlights the relationship between cohesion and the performance among hockey players of Pakistan in view of socio-interactional context. Pakistan won laurels in Field hockey with four World Cup and three Olympics titles to its credit but no effort has been made to find out the factors which have turned Pakistan (as a team) from the status of a giant into a pygmy during the last two decades. The foremost objective of this paper is to scrutinize the relationship between cohesion and players’ performance. A sample of 296 players from 14sport departments was chosen as respondents. Adopted questionnaire was used to collect the survey data. The findings highlighted the significant (p=.001) relationship between cohesion and players’ performance. It is concluded that the cohesiveness among players is to be developed and expanded regarding players’ performance to fulfil sport requirements. Recommendations have been made to raise the excellence, relevance, and legitimacy in team regarding cohesion with players’ performance.   Keywords: Cohesion; Performance; Hockey; Pakistan.   1 Department of Physical Education & Sports Sciences,  The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Pakistan.  2 Faculty of Sports Science and Coaching,  Sultan Idris Education University, TanjongMalim, Malaysia.  3 Sports Division, Higher Education Commission, Pakistan     Vol.2, Issue 1, 2017                                                          THE SPARK  20  Introduction  Field hockey is one of the popular and well known sports not only in Asia but also played throughout the world. Hockey is a viable game where players contest opposing to their rivals on the similar turf of action(Asghar, 2011). Physical demands of the field hockey have enlarged greater than before due to both amendments in the rules and playing surface(Elferink-Gemser, Visscher, Lemmink, & Mulder, 2007). Field hockey has become the superb and the fastest sport of the world due to the latest changes in its academic and practical structure.  Cohesion is supposed to be a sticky that clamps team participants in a collected form (Onag, & Tepeci, 2014). The cohesion is defined as “a dynamic process that is reflected in the tendency for a group to stick together and remain united in the pursuit of its instrumental objectives and/or for the satisfaction of member affective needs” (Carron,Brawley, &Widmeyer, 1998). Cohesion in sport teams is not a concept of unity; it has numerous extents, for instance, social and task cohesion both representing individual or group (Carron, Shapcott, & Burke, 2007a). Social units, working in clusters, rebellious teams, criminal groups, analytical groups, and sport teams are completely dissimilar but they altogether are too comparable in the intelligence that the people remain switch together and combined in shape of the social group because they attribute to certain fundamental shared determination(Carron, 1982).  Cohesion is well thought-out a unique feature of successful teams, it may be in the area of exertion, armed, sport, or exercise (Carron, Eys, & Burke, 2007b).Recognized behavioral methods organized through sport coaches who motivated or non-motivated to players consuming particular influences on team cohesion(Stewart, &Owens, 2011). To know the backgrounds and significances related to improvement of an effective administrative environment that is social relationships (within players and leader or among the players themselves), individual gratification, cohesiveness, confidence(Carron, 1982). Cohesion in a team or group can change time to time and the major factors stick the team or group together initial in its existence can or cannot be daring once the team or group is well-built (Carron, Hausenblas, &Eys, 2005). However, the    Vol.2, Issue 1, 2017                                                          THE SPARK  21  existing cohesiveness among Pakistani hockey players is not up to the mark to perform well in international arena.   2. Methodology  2.1 Population  Population is a bigger group of all essentials in which a researcher goes to simplify his or her sample results(Johnson, & Christensen, 2012). The population of the study was all national departmental players who were registered with Pakistan Hockey Federation (PHF). The PHF is a supreme sport body in Pakistan that deals with all affairs of field hockey in Pakistan.  2.2 Sampling Procedure The sample size was 510 respectively of field hockey players from the 14 National field hockey departments. Larger sample size improves power and reduces estimation error. According to the general rule of thumb, the sample size should not be less than 50 respondents for a correlation or regression analysis to examine the relationships (VanVoorhis, & Morgan, 2007). Sampling is a method of forming a sample within a population; researchers examine the uniqueness of the sample collected within the population to know the uniqueness of a bigger group ( Johnson, & Christensen, 2012). Two categories of sampling are often used as probability and non-probability sampling(Singh, 2007). However, purposive and convenient sampling areemployed under non-probability sampling.  2.3 Instrumentation Researchers have used questionnaire as instrument for data collection. A questionnaire is a procedure in a survey in which individuals involve in a study are required to fill and send it back to the researcher (Creswell, 2014). The scales shown in Table 1 were adapted and modified the items afterward with the permission of original authors. The survey instrument matrix is shown in Table 1. Table 1: Survey Instrument Matrix Item Survey Questions Literature Sources 12 items  Performance of Players  [Chelladurai, &Saleh(1980)] 09 items  Team Cohesion  [Carron, Widmeyer, & Brawley (1985)]   Vol.2, Issue 1, 2017                                                          THE SPARK  22  2.4 Data Collection Procedure Copies of questionnaire werecirculatedto players in their respective departments at the scheduled time. The participants were briefed to go their homes with the scale and sent back the filled questionnaires to the office of their departments within the prescribed time. However, to make it more convenient, the researchers’ personal hand-phone numbers and e-mail addresses were also mentioned in the covering letter of the questionnaire for any inquiry or difficulty. 296 participants responded out of 510 from 14 National field hockey departments of Pakistan with their opinions in survey questionnaire.   2.5 Data Analysis Technique Descriptive statistics and Pearson’s correlation were used for analyzing the data after the process of data collection.  3. Results A number of 296 participants with their age level of 21 to 28 years contributed to the existing study viaquestionnaire. A correlation matrix among sub-variables of team cohesion and players’ performance was generated. The results of the analysis are shown in Table 2. There were four significant positive correlations investigated among the six imaginable mixtures. Personal factors positively and significantly correlated to tactical skill (r = .14, p< .05). The results exhibited that in spite of, significant relationship between personal factors of players and tactical skills, the strength of the relationship found weaker.     Vol.2, Issue 1, 2017                                                          THE SPARK  23  Table 2: Pearson Correlations among sub-variables of Cohesion and Players Performance (n-296) Sub-Variables Cohesion  (Personal Factors) Cohesion  (Team Factors) Players Performance (Tactical Skills) Correlation .139* .817** Sig. (2-tailed) .017 .000 Players Performance (Interpersonal Skills) Correlation .034 .934** Sig. (2-tailed) .556 .000 Players Performance (Communicational Skills) Correlation .034 .931** Sig. (2-tailed) .514 .000  **correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2- tailed) *  correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2- tailed)  On the other hand, team factors were strongly, significantly, and positively correlated to tactical skill (r = .82, p< .01), interpersonal skills (r = .93, p< .01), and communicational skills (r = .93, p< .01) as displayed in Table 2. Results from the correlations analysis pointed out that team factors had a resilient, significant and positive relationship with tactical skills of national hockey players. In addition to, the analysis of the team factors also directed a significant and extremely positive correlation with interpersonal skills of field hockey players. Furthermore, the positive significant relationship between team factors and communicational skills was found higher and strong.  4. Discussions and Conclusion The findings of the current study revealed overall significant relationship among the sub-variables of players’ performance and cohesion. Several earlier studies have confirmed the optimistic and significant relationship between cohesion and players’ performances (Alemu, &Babu, 2012), (Kanchan, &Tarandeep, 2012), (Murray, 2006), (MohdZainal, &Rosli, 2012),(Eys, et al.,2015). A study reveals that cohesion and players’ performance would improvebeyond time(Chang, Duck, & Bordia, 2006). The fellow   Vol.2, Issue 1, 2017                                                          THE SPARK  24  players are considered more important component in the player’s sport setting.Cohesion and performance look like as positively associated to interacting teams such as basketball and hockey, and negatively associated to sports needing independent act such as track event or coaction as rowing(Home, & Carron,1985). Players of further cohesive teams may grasp solid mutual opinions in their capability that in line may make possible better team success. Based on the finding, the results indicated that personal factors had positive relationship with the performance of players (tactical skills), however, the association was found very weak but significant. Though, the tactical knowledge is upraised to game ability comprising of anticipation and decision-making skills (Elferink-Gemser, et al., 2004). The reason may be that some of field hockey players play their personal game to show their abilities individually within the team and show individual performance. This may be the reason that the players have less cohesiveness among each other being a team. If all players of the team are on same page, it is not only good for players but also beneficial for the whole team. On the other hand, the finding revealed that personal factors had non-significant relationship with two of the performance variables as interpersonal skills and communicational skills. One of the studyrevealedthat existingnon-significant relationship between cohesion and team success(Landers, &Luschen, 1974).The reason may be that most of Pakistani players have less communication among each other and with coach, and less use of interpersonal skills within the course of playing the game/match (Dobrescu, 2014). However, the Pakistani coaches and team management should provide due consideration on development of interpersonal skills and communicational skills not only for the better performance but also for the improvement of overall, cohesiveness of a team.  References   Alemu, S. M., &Babu, M. S. (2012). The relationship between coaches’ leadership styles, team cohesion and team success: the case of premier league soccer clubs in Ethiopia. International Journal of Social Science & Interdisciplinary Research, 1(11), 1-13.   Vol.2, Issue 1, 2017                                                          THE SPARK  20   Asghar, E. (2011). A comparative study of multidimensional talent in field hockey at development stage between the players of Germany and Pakistan (Doctoral dissertation, University of Leipzig, Germany). Retrieved from http://library.gcu.edu.pk/Thesis/PhD/GCUFAC-18.pdf  Carron, A. V. (1982).  Cohesiveness in sport groups: Interpretations and considerations. Journal of Sport Psychology, 4, 123-138.  Carron, A. V., Brawley, L. R., &Widmeyer, W. N. (1998).The measurement of cohesiveness in sport groups.In J. L. Duda (Ed.), Advances in sport and exercise psychology measurement (pp. 213-226). Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.  Carron, A. V., Eys, M. A., & Burke, S. M. (2007b). Team cohesion: Nature, correlates, and development. In S. Jowett & D. Lavallee (Eds.), Social psychology in sport (pp. 91-101). Champaign, USA: Human Kinetics.  Carron, A. V., Hausenblas, H. A., &Eys, M. A. (2005). Group dynamics in sport (3rd ed.). Morgantown, WV. Fitness Information Technology.  Carron, A. V., Shapcott, K. M., & Burke, S. M. (2007a).Group cohesion in sport and exercise: Past, present and future. In M. R. Beauchamp, & M. A. Eys (Eds.), Group dynamics in exercise and sport psychology: Contemporary themes (pp. 117-139). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.  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 Psychology, 7, 244-266.  Chang, A., Duck, J., & Bordia, P. (2006).Understanding the multidimensionality of group development.Small Group Research, 37(4), 327-350.   Vol.2, Issue 1, 2017                                                          THE SPARK  21   Chelladurai, P., &Saleh, S. D. (1980). Dimensions of leader behavior in sports: Development of a leadership scale. Journal of Sport Psychology, 2, 34-45  Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design (International Student Edition) Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4thed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.  Dobrescu, T. (2014). The role of non-verbal communication in the coach-athlete relationship. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 149, 286–291.  Elferink-Gemser, M. T., Visscher, C., Lemmink, K. A. P. M., &Mulder, T. W. (2004).Relation between multidimensional performance characteristics and level of performance in talented youth field hockey players.Journal of sports sciences, 22, 1053–1063. doi:10.1080/02640410410001729991 Elferink-Gemser, M. T., Visscher, C., Lemmink, K. A. P. M., & Mulder, T. (2007). Multidimensional performance characteristics and standard of performance in talented youth field hockey players: a longitudinal study. Journal of sports sciences, 25(4), 481–899. doi:10.1080/02640410600719945  Eys, M., Ohlert, J., Evans, M. B., Wolf, S. A., Martin, L. J., Bussel, M V., & Steins, C. (2015). Cohesion and performance for female and male sport teams.The Sport Psychologist,29, 97 -109.  Home, T., & Carron,A. V. (1985) “Compatibility in coach-athlete relationship. Journal of Sport Psychology, 7, 137-149.  Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2012).Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mix approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.    Vol.2, Issue 1, 2017                                                          THE SPARK  20  Kanchan, Singh, R., &Tarandeep.(2012). Relationship between team cohesion and performance in ball games.VSRD Technical & Non-Technical Journal 3(5), 191–196.  Landers, D. M., &Luschen, G. (1974).Team performance outcome and cohesiveness of competitive coacting groups.International Review of Sport Sociology, 9, 57-69.  MohdZainal, M. H., &Rosli, M. (2012).The relationship between group cohesiveness and performance: An empirical study of cooperatives movement in Malaysia. International Journal of Cooperative Studies, 1(1), 15-20.  Murray, N. P. (2006). The differential effect of team cohesion and leadership behavior in high school sports.Individual Differences Research, 4(4), 216–225.  Onag, Z., &Tepeci, M. (2014). Team effectiveness in sport teams: The effects of team cohesion, intra team communication and team norms on team member satisfaction and intent to remain.Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 150, 420 – 428.  Singh, K. (2007). “Quantitative social research methods”, New Delhi: SAGE Publications.  Stewart, C., &Owens, L. (2011). Behavioral characteristics of favorite Coaches: Implications for Coach Education. The Physical Educator, 68(2), 90-97.  VanVoorhis, C. R. W., & Morgan, B. L. (2007). Understanding power and rules of thumb for determining sample sizes. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 3(2), 43-50.  

THE RELATIONSHIP STUDY BETWEEN COHESION AND PERFORMANCEOF PLAYERS OF HOCKEY, IN PAKISTAN

https://journal.suit.edu.pk/index.php/spark/article/download/185/187

THE RELATIONSHIP STUDY BETWEEN COHESION AND PERFORMANCEOF PLAYERS OF HOCKEY, IN PAKISTAN

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Sarhad University of Science & Information Technology (SUIT), Peshawar: E-Journals