A Research into Evaluation of Basketball Athletes’ Risk Perception Level

Abstract

The aim of this study is to compare the risk perception levels of Basketball athletes in Turkish League teams according to some variables. In this research the “general screening model”, which is one of the descriptive screening methods, was used. While the population of the study consists of athletes actively engaged in the Turkish basketball league teams, its sampling consists of 229 athletes selected by chance and at random methods, which have been playing in different clubs. The questionnaire of Gok was used as a data tool in the study to perception of risk in sports. The difference between the risk perception levels according to the variables of gender, education level and years of playing basketball of the athletes who participated in the study were statistically significant. However, according to the variables of marital status and age of the athletes, the difference between the levels of risk perception statistically was not significant. Results showed that the average risk of female athletes were higher than the average risk of male athletes. The average risk of the athletes educated at high-school level were lower than the average risk of athletes educated at university and postgraduate level, average risk of athletes who play basketball between 1-5 years was lower than the average risk of athletes who play basketball between 6-10, 11-15, 16-20 and above 21 years. Basketball clubs, in order to be robust, should have professional managers in their club managements. Sports clubs should employ specialized advisors regarding the risks that players may encounter. In sports clubs, satisfaction of the players should be the first goal and expectations from them should be clearly specified. Sports clubs should also ask the players’ opinions when preparing strategic plans against the risk factors that may occur.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.