Kyle F. Paradis

Team Building in Sport: Linking Theory and Research to Practical Application

This article provides a general overview and presents various effective methods for developing and implementing team building programs based on different desired outcomes in sport. Specifically, a background on team building is provided, followed by the presentation of different outcomes and benefits found in previous successful team building programs. A team building conceptual model (Carron & Spink, 1993) and a four-stage approach (Carron & Spink, 1993) are described. In addition, implementation and effectiveness of various interventions are discussed based on the recommendations from a number of researchers (e.g., Eys, Patterson, Loughead, & Carron, 2006). Finally, implications for practice are discussed.

Cohesion in Sport: New Directions for Practitioners

The general objectives of the present article are to provide an overview of the group dynamics phenomenon known as “cohesion” and convey useful information to practitioners with regard to its conceptualization, measurement, and development. Within these broad areas, a focus is placed on recent advances in our understanding of cohesion in sport by discussing (a) age related developmental differences in group perceptions, (b) new alternatives in the measurement of cohesion, and (c) suggestions for developing and improving cohesion.

Development and validation of an inventory to assess conflict in sport teams: the Group Conflict Questionnaire

Abstract The purpose of the study was to develop and validate a conceptually and psychometrically sound conflict questionnaire for sport. The development process involved 3 phases: (a) a qualitative phase, (b) a content and factorial validity phase and (c) a construct validity phase. A total of 50 items were generated and sent to 6 experts to determine content validity. Through this process, 25 items were retained and administered to a sample of athletes (n = 437) to determine factorial validity. Based on these results, a second sample (n = 305) was administered the 14-item version of the Group Conflict Questionnaire along with the Group Environment Questionnaire, the Athlete Satisfaction Questionnaire and the Passion Scale to test convergent, discriminant and known-group difference validity. Cross-validation from both samples via confirmatory factor analysis yielded moderate-to-acceptable model fit, thus supporting factorial validity for the 14-item version. Additionally, initial support for convergent validity and known-group difference validity and partial support for discriminant validity were found. A sport-specific conflict questionnaire is now available for researchers to utilise. Results and research implications are discussed.