杜登明Do, Deng-Ming2017-02-222025-07-302017-02-222017-02-22https://ir.ntus.edu.tw/handle/987654321/70582學位類別：碩士校院名稱：國立臺灣體育學院系所名稱：體育研究所畢業學年度：89年論文頁數：92頁中文摘要 　　本研究的目的在探討三級學校男子籃球選手目標取向、教練領導行為與運動動機之差異，以及各變項間之相關與預測。以國內三級學校男子籃球選手（國中108名、高中106名、大學122名共計336名）為研究對象，施以「運動目標取向量表」、「運動領導量表」、「運動動機量表」等量表。並將測量結果以相依樣本t檢定、單因子變異數分析與事後比較、皮爾森積差相關、多元逐步回歸分析進行統計處理。 　　所得結果如下：（一）全體選手的「工作取向」顯著高於「自我取向」；國中選手的「工作取向」顯著高於高中與大學選手；高中選手的「自我取向」顯著高於大學選手。（二）全體選手「喜愛的」與「知覺的」教練領導行為有顯著差異;國中選手喜愛的「訓練與指導 」顯著高於大學選手；國中選手喜愛的「民主的行為」、「社會支持的行為」顯著高於高中與大學選手；國中、高中選手知覺的「訓練與指導」的顯著高於大學選手；國中選手知覺的「民主的行為」、「社會支持的行為」顯著高於高中與大學選手；高中選手知覺的「專制的行為」顯著高於大學選手。（三）高中選手「外在動機」顯著高於大學選手。（四）全體選手之「工作取向」、「自我取向」與「內在動機」、「外在動機」皆呈顯著正相關；全體選手之「工作取向」與「無動機」呈顯著負相關，「自我取向」與「無動機」呈顯著正相關；全體選手之「工作取向」和「自我取向」能有效預測「內在動機」和「外在動機」，而「工作取向」對「內在動機」有較高的預測力，「自我取向」對「外在動機」有較高的預測力。（五）除了選手所喜愛的「專制的行為」與「內在動機」無顯著相關外，其餘選手所喜愛的領導行為皆與「內在動機」、「外在動機」呈顯著正相關；所有選手喜愛的「專制的行為」與「無動機」呈顯著負相關；全體選手喜愛的「社會支持的行為」、「訓練與指導」能有效預測「內在動機」，而「社會支持的行為」有較高的預測力；選手喜愛的「獎賞（回饋）的行為」、「專制的行為」、「社會支持的行為」能有效預測「外在動機」，而「獎賞（回饋）的行為」、「專制的行為」有較高的預測力；選手喜愛的「專制的行為」能有效預測「無動機」。（六）除了選手喜愛的「專制的行為」與「工作取向」呈顯著負相關外，其餘選手喜愛的教練領導行為皆與「工作取向」、「自我取向」呈顯著正相關；全體選手喜愛的「社會支持的行為」能有效預測「工作取向」；選手喜愛的「專制的行為」和「獎賞（回饋）的行為」能有效預測「自我取向」，而「專制的行為」有較高的預測力。ABSTRACT 　　The purposes of this study ware to examine the differences among Goal Orientation, Coach Leadership Behaviors and Sport Motivation among basketball players; furthermore, to predict the relationships among these variables. A total of 336 male basketball players (108 junior high school students, 106 senior high school students and 122 university students) ware selected as participants. All participants were asked to complete the Sport Goal Orientations Questionnaire, Leadership Scale for Sports, and Sport Motivation Questionnaire. The collection data were analyzed in terms of the paired samples t-test, one-way ANOVA, the Pearson’s correlation and multiple stepwise regression analysis. 　The results of this study indicated that: (1) All participants’ task orientation ware higher than ego orientation; junior high school players’task orientation ware higher than senior high school players and university players; senior high school players’ ego orientation ware higher than university players’. (2) A significant differences ware found in preferred and perceived coach leadership behaviors for all participants; junior high school players prefer their coaches to have training and instruction more than university players; junior high school players prefer their coaches to have democratic behavior and social support more than senior high school and university players; junior and senior high school players perceive their coaches to have training and instruction more than university players; junior high school players perceive their coaches to have democratic behavior and social support more than senior high school and university players; senior high school players perceive their coaches to have autocratic behavior more than university players. (3) Senior high school players had higher extrinsic motivation than university players. (4) All players’ task orientation and ego orientation ware positively related to intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation; all players’ task orientation ware negatively related to amotivation, while ego orientation ware positively related to amotivation; all players’ task orientation and ego orientation ware effective predictors of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, however task orientation was more predictive to intrinsic motivation and ego orientation was more predictive to extrinsic motivation. (5) All players’ preference coach leadership behaviors was positively related to intrinsic and extrinsic motivation except for players’ preferred autocratic behavior had no relation to intrinsic motivation; all players’ prefer autocratic behavior had negatively related amotivation; all players’ preferred social support and training and instruction ware two effective predictors of intrinsic motivation, and social support behaviors ware more efficient; all players’ preferred positive feedback, autocratic behavior, social support ware three effective predictors of extrinsic motivation, while positive feedback and autocratic behavior ware more efficient; all players’ preferred autocratic behavior was an effective predictor of amotivation. (6) All players’ preferred coach leadership behaviors ware positively related to task and ego orientation except for players’ prefer autocratic behavior ware no related to task orientation; all players’ preferred social support was an effective predictor of task orientation; all players’ preferred autocratic behavior and positive feedback ware two effective predictors of ego orientation, while autocratic behavior was more efficient.目　次　　　 第一章　緒論 　第一節　研究背景……………………………………………………………1 　第二節　研究動機……………………………………………………………3 　第三節　研究目的……………………………………………………………6 　第四節　研究問題……………………………………………………………6 　第五節　研究範圍與限制……………………………………………………7 　第六節　名詞解釋……………………………………………………………7 第二章　文獻探討 　第一節　目標取向理論………………………………………………………10 　第二節　目標取向與運動動機之相關的文獻………………………………12 　第三節　教練領導行為與運動動機之相關的文獻…………………………15 　第四節　研究假設……………………………………………………………19 第三章　研究方法與步驟 　第一節　研究架構……………………………………………………………21 　第二節　研究工具……………………………………………………………22 　第三節　研究對象……………………………………………………………24 　第四節　施測程序……………………………………………………………26 　第五節　施測時間與地點……………………………………………………26 　第六節　資料分析……………………………………………………………26 第四章　結果與討論 　第一節　結果…………………………………………………………………28 　一、三級學校籃球選手目標取項之差異……………………………………30 　二、三級學校籃球選手知覺與喜愛教練領導行為之差異…………………33 　三、三級學校籃球選手運動動機之差異……………………………………42 　四、三級學校籃球選手運動目標取向與運動動機間之相關與預測………44 　五、三級學校籃球選手喜愛教練領導行為與運動動機之相關與預測……48 　六、三級學校籃球選手喜愛教練領導行為與目標取向之相關與預測……52 　第二節　討論…………………………………………………………………55 　一、三級學校籃球選手目標取項之差異……………………………………55 　二、三級學校籃球選手知覺與喜愛教練領導行為之差異…………………56 　三、三級學校籃球選手運動動機之差異……………………………………59 　四、三級學校籃球選手運動目標取向與運動動機間之相關與預測………60 　五、三級學校籃球選手喜愛教練領導行為與運動動機之相關與預測……64 　六、三級學校籃球選手喜愛教練領導行為與目標取向之相關與預測……66 第五章　結論與建議 　第一節　結論…………………………………………………………………69 　第二節　建議…………………………………………………………………73191864 bytesapplication/pdf運動動機;目標取向;教練領導行為;籃球選手sport motivation;goal orientation;coach leadership behavior;basketball playerthesis