Andersen Mark B, McCullagh Penny, Wilson Gabriel J
School of Human Movement, Recreation, and Performance, Centre for Ageing, Rehabilitation, Exercise, and Sport, Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia.
J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2007 Oct;29(5):664-72. doi: 10.1123/jsep.29.5.664.
Many of the measurements used in sport psychology research are arbitrary metrics, and researchers often cannot make the jump from scores on paper-and-pencil tests to what those scores actually mean in terms of real-world behaviors. Effect sizes for behavioral data are often interpretable, but the meaning of a small, medium, or large effect for an arbitrary metric is elusive. We reviewed all the issues in the 2005 volumes of the Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, The Sport Psychologist, and the Journal of Applied Sport Psychology to determine whether the arbitrary metrics used in sport psychology research were interpreted, or calibrated, against real-world variables. Of the 54 studies that used quantitative methods, 25 reported only paper-and-pencil arbitrary metrics with no connections to behavior or other real-world variables. Also, 44 of the 54 studies reported effect sizes, but only 7 studies, using both arbitrary and behavioral metrics, had calculated effect indicators and interpreted them in terms of real-world meaning.
运动心理学研究中使用的许多测量方法都是任意的指标，研究人员往往无法从纸笔测试的分数推断出这些分数在实际行为方面的真正含义。行为数据的效应大小通常是可以解释的，但对于一个任意指标来说，小、中或大效应的含义却难以捉摸。我们查阅了《运动与锻炼心理学杂志》《运动心理学家》和《应用运动心理学杂志》2005年卷中的所有问题，以确定运动心理学研究中使用的任意指标是否根据现实世界变量进行了解释或校准。在54项使用定量方法的研究中，25项仅报告了纸笔任意指标，与行为或其他现实世界变量没有关联。此外，54项研究中有44项报告了效应大小，但只有7项研究同时使用了任意指标和行为指标，并计算了效应指标并根据现实世界意义进行了解释。
