An Analysis on General Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Swimming Referees in Terms of Demographic Variables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to investigate the general self-efficacy beliefs of licensed swimming referees who actively serve in Turkish Swimming Federation in terms of variables age, gender, educational status, level of referee, the reason to become a referee, professional experience and satisfaction level. The population of the study is composed of a total of 450 swimming referees participating to the Swimming Referee Development Seminar in Antalya in 2016. In addition, the research sample is randomly selected by 212 swimming referees (6 FINA, 74 National and 132 Provincial referees) including 95 females and 117 males were selected in this seminar. A five-point likert-scale “General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES)”, which was developed by Sherer et al. (1982), presented by Magaletta and Oliver (1999) as 17 items and adapted into Turkish culture by Yıldırım and İlhan (2010), was used in the study as data collection tool. Necessary formal permissions were obtained from Turkish Swimming Federation for the scale applied to the referees. Descriptive statistics, reliability analysis, factor analysis, an independent samples t test, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Post-Hoc test (Tukey HSD) were applied to data by using SPSS Statistics. An analysis with p<0.05 is considered statistically significant. Cronbach Alpha value was calculated as .949 for the scale. As a result of factorial analysis, two factors with an eigenvalue greater than one were obtained, and it was observed that these two factorial structures revealed 62.63% of the total variance. In addition, according to Bartlett’s test, this test was considered significant (p<0.05). As a result of the study, it was found that the swimming referees showed significant differences in terms of the variables of general self-efficacy beliefs such as level of referee, the reason to become a referee, professional experience and satisfaction level and it can be said that these variables are the determinants of the self-efficacy beliefs of swimming referees.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".