EXAMINATION OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ANXIETY AND SELF-EFFICACY LEVELS OF VOLLEYBALL COACHES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v22.n7.3946Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Volleyball, Coach, Self-efficacyAbstract
The aim of this study is to analyze the AI anxiety levels and self-efficacy levels of third-level volleyball coaches by evaluating them in terms of various demographic variables. Third-level volleyball coaches were included in the study. In addition to the personal information form, the Artificial Intelligence Anxiety Scale developed by Wang and Wang and the Coach Efficacy Scale-II revised by Myers, Feltz, Chase, Reckase and Hancock were used in the data collection tool. G-Power analysis was performed to determine the sample size and the minimum number of participants was determined. No statistically significant difference was found in the analyses made according to the variables of gender, age, marital status, education level and AI tool usage of the coaches. However, a significant difference was found in the evaluation made in terms of the variable of years of coaching. According to the results of the Tukey test, which is a post-hoc analysis, it was determined that the AI anxiety levels of third-level volleyball coaches with less coaching experience were lower. In addition, no statistically significant relationship was found between the artificial intelligence anxiety levels and self-efficacy levels of third-level volleyball coaches at the 0.05 level.
References
1. Aksu, M., Güler, C., & Donuk, B. (2024). Futbol Antrenörlerinin Kariyer Stresi ve Mesleki Yeterlilikleri. International Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research (JSHSR), 11(111), 1683–1691. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13864036.
2. Al Fadeel, M. A., Khalifah, N. A., Alshammari, H. S., Smaisem, F. S., Al Qahtani, H. A., Al Otaibi, A. K., ... & Al Ameer, R. A. (2021). Artificial Intelligence in Patient Care in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 2019-2020.
3. Anshel, M. H. (2003). Sport psychology: From theory to practice (4th Eds.). San Francisco, CA: B. Cummings.
4. Ateş, N. (2023). Examınatıon of the leadership characteristics of individual and team sports coaches according to some demographic variables. Revista de Gestão e Secretariado, 14(10), 17677-17690.
5. Baca, A., & Kornfeind, P. (2012). Real-time feedback systems in sports. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 11(3), 78–85. https://doi.org/10.1109/MPRV.2012.41.
6. Bandura A (1982) Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency, American Psychologist, 37, 127.
7. Beswick, B. (2016). Odak noktamız futbol. Çev.: E. Süren. İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi.
8. Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. WW Norton & Company.
9. Brosnan, M. J. (1998). Technophobia: The psychological impact of information technology. Routledge.
10. Bulut, H., Kınoğlu, B. G. & Karaduman, B. (2022). Diş Hekimlerinde Yapay Zekâ Kaygı Durumlarının İncelenmesi. 26. Türk Diş Hekimleri Birliği Uluslararası Diş Hekimliği Kongresi, İstanbul.
11. Campbell, T., & Sullivan, P. (2005). The effect of a coaching education program on coaching efficacy and leadership style. The Sport Psychologist, 19(4), 395–408. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.19.4.395.
12. Carling, C., Reilly, T., & Williams, A. M. (2009). Performance assessment for field sports: Physiological, psychological and match notational assessment in practice. Routledge.
13. Cave, S., Coughlan, K., & Dihal, K. (2019). “Scary robots”: Examining public responses to AI. Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, 331–337. https://doi.org/10.1145/3306618.3314232.
14. Cave, S., & Dihal, K. (2020). The whiteness of AI. Philosophy & Technology, 33(4), 685–703. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00415-6.
15. Chase, M. A., Lirgg, C. D., & Feltz, D. F. (1997). Do coaches’ efficacy expectations for their teams predict team performance? The Sport Psychologist, 11, 8-23.
16. Chatterjee, S., Rana, N. P., Tamilmani, K., & Sharma, A. (2021). The acceptance of artificial intelligence in human resource management: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Information Management, 58, 102312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102312.
17. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Araştırma deseni: Nitel, nicel ve karma yöntem yaklaşımları. Selçuk B. Demir (Çev.). Ankara: Eğiten Kitap.
18. Cumming, S. P., Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L., & Hunt, E. B. (2007). Coaches’ and athletes’ perceptions of coaching efficacy: A case study. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 2(3), 257–270. https://doi.org/10.1260/174795407782233033.
19. Çavuş, H. & Günbatar, M. S. (2008). “Bilgisayar Kaygı Ölçeğinin Türkçeye Uyarlama Çalışması”. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28: 147–163. Gazi University.
20. Davenport, T. H. & Ronanki, R. (2020). Gerçek Dünya İçin Yapay Zekâ, (HBR’S 10 MUST READS) Yapay Zeka, Çev: Nadir Özata, Optimist.
21. Demir, A., & Kabakçı, A. C. (2020). Kano antrenörlerinin psikolojik sağlamlıkları, algılanan öz-yeterlikleri ve yaşam doyumu arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. Uluslararası Egzersiz Psikolojisi Dergisi, 2(1),21-28.
22. Dumangöz, P. D. & Sanlav, R. (2021). Voleybol Antrenörlerinin Mesleki Öz Yeterlik Düzeylerinin Bazı Demografik Özelliklere Göre İncelenmesi. Akdeniz Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 4 (2) , 251-264. DOI: 10.38021/asbid.956931.
23. Epstein, S. (1972). The nature of anxiety with emphasis upon its relationship to expectancy. In C. D. Spielberger (Ed.), Anxiety: Current trends in theory and research (Vol.2, pp. 291–337). New York: Academic Press.
24. Feltz, D. L. Chase, M. A., Moritz, S. E. ve Sullivan, P. J. (1999). A conceptual model of coaching efficacy: Preliminary investigation and instrument development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 765-776.
25. Feltz, D. L., Lirgg C. D. (2001). Self-efficacy Beliefs of Athletes, Teams, and Coaches. Handbook of Sport Psychology, 2 nd ed. (pp. 340-361).
26. Filiz, E., Güzel, Ş., & Şengül, A. (2022). Sağlık profesyonellerinin yapay zekâ kaygı durumlarının incelenmesi, Journal of Academic Value Studies, 8(1), 47-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.29228/javs.57808.
27. Fortuna, P., Łysiak, M., Chumak, M., & Mcneill, M. (2023). Barriers of human and nonhuman agents’ integration in positive hybrid systems: the relationship between the anthropocentrism, artificial intelligence anxiety, and attitudes towards humanoid robots. Journal for Perspectives of Economic Political and Social Integration, 28(2), 121-149. https://doi.org/10.18290/pepsi-2022-0010.
28. Gibbs, M., Meese, J., Arnold, M., Nansen, B., & Carter, M. (2021). Algorithmic anxiety and coping: Investigating people’s strategies for resisting algorithmic surveillance. Information, Communication & Society, 24(5), 670–686. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1713841.
29. Gould, D., Greenleaf, C., Lauer, L., & Chung, Y. (1999). Lessons from Nagano. Olympic Coach, 9 (3), 2-5.
30. Grote, T., & Berens, P. (2020). On the ethics of algorithmic decision-making in healthcare. The Journal of Medical Ethics, 46(3), 205–211. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-105586.
31. Ha, J. G., Page, T., & Thorsteinsson, G. (2011). “A study on technophobia and mobile device design”. International Journal of Contents, 7(2): 17–25.
32. Hsu, W. T., Shang, I. W., Pan, Y. H., & Chou, C. C. (2023). Students’ Efficacy Profiles and Outcomes of Perceived Relation-Inferred Self-Efficacy Support in Physical Education. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 21(1), 56-69.
33. Huang, Y.C. (2006). The relationships among job satisfaction, perefessional commitment, organizational alienation and coaching efficacy of school volleyball coaches in Taiwan. United States Sport Academy, USA: ProQuest Dissetations Publishing.
34. Jiang, Y., Li, X., Luo, H., Yin, ·. S., & Kaynak, O. (2022). Quo vadis artificial intelligence? . Discover Artifcial Intelligence, 2(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-022-00022-8.
35. Johnson, D. G. & Verdicchio, M. (2017). “AI Anxiety. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology”, 68(9): 2267–2270. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23867
36. Kavussanu, M., Boardley, I.D., Jutkiewicz, N., Vincent, S. & Ring, C. (2008). Coaching efficacy and coaching effectiveness: Examining their predictors and comparing coaches’ and athletes’ reports. The Sport Psychologist, 22, 383-404.
37. Koçak, Ç. V. ve Güven, Ö. (2018). Voleybol antrenörü mesleki öz yeterlik ölçeği geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Spormetre Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 16(2), 162-177.
38. Koçak, Ç.V. (2019). Antrenör adaylarının antrenör öz-yeterlik düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Spormetre Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 17(1), 55-66. doi: 10.33689/spormetre.520507.
39. Kowalski, C.L. (2007). An analysis of coaching efficacy in volunteer soccer coaches. Master Thesis, North Iowa University. U.S.A.
40. Lin, C. H., Liu, C. Y., Huang, C. C., & Rong, J. R. (2022). Frailty and Quality of Life Among Older Adults in Communities: The Mediation Effects of Daily Physical Activity and Healthy Life Self-Efficacy. Geriatrics, 7(6), 125.
41. Manyika, J., Lund, S., Chui, M., Bughin, J., Woetzel, J., Batra, P., ... & Sanghvi, S. (2017). Jobs lost, jobs gained: Workforce transitions in a time of automation. McKinsey Global Institute, 150(1), 1-148.
42. Malete, L. ve Feltz, D. L. (2000). The effect of a coaching education program on coaching efficacy. The Sport Psychologist, 14(4), 410-417.
43. Maskara, R., Bhootra, V., Thakkar, D. & Nishkalank, N. (2017). A study on the perception of medical professionals towards artificial intelligence. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 4(4), 34-39.
44. Mccarthy, J., Minsky, M., Rochester, N. & Shannon, C. E. (2006). A Proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artifcial Intelligence. AI Magazine, 27.
45. Mccarthy, J. (2007). What is artificial intelligence? Basic Questions. Computer Science Department, Stanford University. https://stanford. io/2lSo373.
46. Mokyr, J., Vickers, C. & Ziebarth, N. L. (2015). “The History of Technological Anxiety and the Future of Economic Growth: Is This Time Different?”. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(3): 31–50. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.29.3.31
47. Morris T, Summeres J (1995) Sport Psychology, John Willey- Sons, Melbourne.
48. Myers, N. D., Vargas-Tonsing, T. M., & Feltz, D. L. (2005). Coaching efficacy in intercollegiate coaches: Sources, coaching behavior, and team variables. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 6(2), 129–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2003.11.005.
49. Myers, N. D., Feltz, D. L., Chase, M. A., Reckase, M. D., ve Hancock, G. R. (2008). The coaching efficacy scale II—high school teams. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(6), 1059-1076.
50. Oh, S., Kim, J. H., Choi, S. W., Lee, H. J., Hong, J. & Kwon, S. H. (2019). Physician confidence in artificial intelligence: An online mobile survey. Journal of medical Internet research, 21(3), e12422.
51. Özbek, S., Özaltaş, H.N., Özbek, E. (2021). “Covid-19 Sürecinde Elit ve Antrenör Sporcuların Sportif Performans Düzeylerinin Niteliksel Bir Çalışması”. Türkiye Spor ve Egzersiz Dergisi, 23: 275-286. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tsed/issue/64815/953941
52. Papay, J. P. & Spielberger, C. D. (1986). Assessment of anxiety and achievement in kindergarten and first-and second-grade children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 14(2), 279–286. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00915446
53. Pitino, R. ve Forde, P. (2008). Rebound Rules. The Art of Success 2.0. New York: Harper Collins.
54. Rosen, L. D., Sears, D. C. & Weil, M. M. (1992). Measuring Technophobia. A Manual for the administration and scoring of three instruments: Computer Anxiety Rating Scale, General Attitudes Toward Computers Scale and Computer Thoughts Survey. California State University, Dominguez Hills, Computerphobia Reduction Programs.
55. Schepman, A., & Rodway, P. (2020). Initial validation of the General Attitudes towards Artificial Intelligence Scale. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 1, 100014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2020.100014.
56. Seçkin Ağırbaş, İ., Erel, S. ve Belli, E. (2020). Antrenörlerin öz yeterlilikleri ile iletişim becerileri ilişkisi. Anatolia Sport Research, 1(1), 25-36.
57. Serçek, S. & Korkmaz, M. (2023). Sporda Giyilebilir Teknoloji Üzerine Sistematik Bir Literatür Taraması. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies (IntJCES), 9 (1).
58. Serçek, S. & Korkmaz, M. (2023). Turizm Sektöründe Metaverse’ün Kullanımına İlişkin Sistematik Bir Literatür Çalışması, Sosyal, Beşeri ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 6(5): 701-721.
59. Staub, S., Karaman, E., Kaya, S., Karapınar H. & Güven, E. (2015). Artificial Neural Network and Agility. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 195, 3 July 2015: 1477-1485.
60. Sullivan, P. J., & Nashman, H. W. (2015). Technology use and coaching efficacy. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 10(3), 505–519. https://doi.org/10.1260/1747-9541.10.3.505.
61. Terzi, R. (2020). An adaptation of artificial intelligence anxiety scale into Turkish: Reliability and validity study. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 7(4). 1501-1515.
62. Unutmaz, V. ve Gençer T. (2017). Antrenör yeterlilik ölçeği II'nin Türkçe uyarlama çalışması. Journal of Sport Sciences Researches, 2(2), 69-78.
63. Wang, Y. Y., & Wang, Y. S. (2019). Development and validation of an artificial intelligence anxiety scale: An initial application in predicting motivated learning behavior. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-16.
64. Wang, S., Sun, Z., & Chen, Y. (2023). Effects of Higher Education Institutes’ Artificial Intelligence Capability on Students' Self-Efficacy, Creativity and Learning Performance. Education and Information Technologies, 28(5), 4919-4939.
65. Zhang, B., Dafoe, A., & Dafoe, A. (2019). Artificial intelligence: American attitudes and trends. Center for the Governance of AI, Future of Humanity Institute, University of Oxford. https://governance.ai/files/AI%20American%20Attitudes.pdf.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
I (we) submit this article which is original and unpublished, of my (our) own authorship, to the evaluation of the Veredas do Direito Journal, and agree that the related copyrights will become exclusive property of the Journal, being prohibited any partial or total copy in any other part or other printed or online communication vehicle dissociated from the Veredas do Direito Journal, without the necessary and prior authorization that should be requested in writing to Editor in Chief. I (we) also declare that there is no conflict of interest between the articles theme, the author (s) and enterprises, institutions or individuals.
I (we) recognize that the Veredas do Direito Journal is licensed under a CREATIVE COMMONS LICENSE.
Licença Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
