Abstract
The purpose of this concurrent mixed-method research is to examine the negotiation styles of candidate sports coaches in higher education by using a game-based assessment tool called ENACT game. The research was carried out with 3rd and 4th-degree university students who study in coaching education programs in Turkey. Students consist of 221 male (%68,4) and 102 female (%31,6). Furthermore, 12 volunteer students were interviewed as part of the qualitative part of the research. Results indicate that there is a positive significant relationship between conflict-handling styles and negotiations style only among integrating style and avoiding style. On the other hand, there is no significant relationship between the dominating, compromising, obliging styles of conflict handling and the dominating, compromising, and obliging styles of negotiation, respectively. Interviews with students revealed that negotiations in ENACT game-based assessment are very close to their real-life experience. Besides, it can be stated that discussing the aspects of the student’s views on the goal achievement effort, relationship, and social skills according to the framework of the social interdependence can make significant contributions to further improvement of the ENACT game-based assessment tool.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beyer, S., & Bowden, E. M. (1997). Gender differences in seff-perceptions: Convergent evidence from three measures of accuracy and bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(2), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297232005
Cassidy, T.G., Jones, R.L., Potrac, P. (2008). Understanding sports coaching: The social, cultural and pedagogical foundations of coaching practice: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203892923.
Chang, K. E., Wu, L. J., Weng, S. E., & Sung, Y. T. (2012). Embedding game-based problem-solving phase into problem-posing system for mathematics learning. Computers & Education, 58(2), 775–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.002
Côté, J., & Gilbert, W. (2009). An integrative definition of coaching effectiveness and expertise. International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, 4(3), 307–323. https://doi.org/10.1260/174795409789623892
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
Dell’Aquila, E., Marocco, D., Ponticorvo, M., di Ferdinando, A., Schembri, M., & Miglino, O. (2017). ENACT: Virtual experiences of negotiation. In educational games for soft-skills training in digital environments (pp. 89–103). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06311-9_5
Dorado, M. A., Medina, F. J., Munduate, L., Cisneros, I. F. J., & Euwema, M. (2002). Computer-mediated negotiation of an escalated conflict. Small Group Research, 33(5), 509–524. https://doi.org/10.1177/104649602237168
Drake, L. E. (1995). Negotiation styles in intercultural communication. International Journal of Conflict Management, 6(1), 72–90. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022756
Dzeng, R. J., Lin, K. Y., & Wang, P. R. (2014). Building a construction procurement negotiation training game model: Learning experiences and outcomes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(6), 1115–1135. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12189
Foroughi, C. K., Serraino, C., Parasuraman, R., & Boehm-Davis, D. A. (2016). Can we create a measure of fluid intelligence using puzzle Creator within portal 2? Intelligence, 56, 58–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2016.02.011
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (1993). How to design and evaluate research in education (Vol. 7): McGraw-Hill New York.
Geisinger, K. F. (2003). Testing and assessment in cross-cultural psychology. Handbook of psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471264385.wei1005
Gelfand, M. J., Fulmer, C. A., & Severance, L. (2011). The psychology of negotiation and mediation. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbooks in psychology®. APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, Vol. 3. Maintaining, expanding, and contracting the organization (p. 495–554). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12171-014
Gümüşeli, A. İ. (1994). İzmir ortaöğretim okulları yöneticilerinin öğretmenler ile aralarındaki çatışmaları yönetme biçimleri. Ankara Üniversitesi. https://dspace.ankara.edu.tr/xmlui/handle/20.500.12575/35142
Hall, E. T., Cowan, D. T., & Vickery, W. (2019). You don't need a degree to get a coaching job': Investigating the employability of sports coaching degree students. Sport, Education and Society, 24(8), 883–903. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2018.1482265
Hambleton, R. K., & Bollwark, J. (1991). Adapting tests for use in different cultures: Technical issues and methods.
Hooshyar, D., Ahmad, R. B., Yousefi, M., Fathi, M., Abdollahi, A., Horng, S. J., & Lim, H. (2016). A solution-based intelligent tutoring system integrated with an online game-based formative assessment: Development and evaluation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(4), 787–808. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9433-x
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2003). Field testing integrative negotiations. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 9(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327949PAC0901_02
Kray, L. J., Thompson, L., & Galinsky, A. (2001). Battle of the sexes: Gender stereotype confirmation and reactance in negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 942. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.6.942
Lewis, J. (2010). How institutional environments facilitate co-operative negotiation styles in EU decision-making. Journal of European Public Policy, 17(5), 648–664. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501761003748591
Marocco, D., Pacella, D., Dell’Aquila, E., & Di Ferdinando, A. (2015). Grounding serious game design on scientific findings: The case of ENACT on soft skills training and assessment. In Design for Teaching and Learning in a Networked World (pp. 441-446). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24258-3_37.
Marquis, B. L., & Huston, C. J. (2009). Leadership roles and management functions in nursing: Theory and application: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Maruyama, G. M. (1997). Basics of structural equation modeling: sage publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483345109.
Pearson, V. M., & Stephan, W. G. (1998). Preferences for styles of negotiation: A comparison of Brazil and the US. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22(1), 67–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(97)00036-9
Peters, H., Kyngdon, A., & Stillwell, D. (2021). Construction and validation of a game-based intelligence assessment in minecraft. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106701
Rahim, M. A. (1983). A measure of styles of handling interpersonal conflict. Academy of Management Journal, 26(2), 368–376. https://doi.org/10.5465/255985
Rahim, M. A. (2010). Managing conflict in organizations. Transaction Publishers.
Song, Y., & Sparks, J. R. (2019). Building a game-enhanced formative assessment to gather evidence about middle school students' argumentation skills. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(5), 1175–1196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9637-3
Sleap, M., & Reed, H. (2006). Views of sport science graduates regarding work skills developed at university. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510500400123
Ting-Toomey, S., Gao, G., Trubisky, P., Yang, Z., Kim, H. S., Lin, S. L., & Nishida, T. (1991). Culture, face maintenance, and styles of handling interpersonal conflict: A study in five cultures. International Journal of Conflict Management, 2(4), 275–296. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022702
Van de Vliert, E., & Kabanoff, B. (1990). Toward theory-based measures of conflict management. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 199–209. https://doi.org/10.5465/256359
Verma, V., Baron, T., Bansal, A., & Amresh, A. (2019). Emerging practices in game-based assessment. InGame-based assessment revisited (pp. 327–346). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15569-8_16
Vonkova, H., & Hrabak, J. (2015). The (in) comparability of ICT knowledge and skill self-assessments among upper secondary school students: The use of the anchoring vignette method. Computers & Education, 85, 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.003
Wang, T. H. (2008). Web-based quiz-game-like formative assessment: Development and evaluation. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1247-1263.Chicago. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.11.011
Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D. F., & Summers, G. F. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. Sociological Methodology, 8(1), 84–136. https://doi.org/10.2307/270754
Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Financial support for the ENACT game used in this study was received from the European Union-funded ENACT project under grant agreement no [54,330 l-LLP-l-2013-l-UK-KA3-KA3MP]. All authors contributed to the study’s conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Özgür Yaşar Akyar and Gıyasettin Demirhan. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Özgür Yaşar Akyar and Gıyasettin Demirhan commented on previous versions of the manuscript. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article. Before data collection, the methodology for this study was approved by the ethics committee of the Hacettepe University. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Participants have consented to the submission of the case report to the journal.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Akyar, Ö.Y., Demirhan, G. Assessment of negotiation styles in higher education through a game-based assessment tool. Educ Inf Technol 27, 4987–5004 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10823-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10823-6