Sustainability of Success in Sports Teams: Who Will Be the Captain?
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I read the article "Sustainability of Success in Sports Teams: Who Will Be The 2 Captain?", but unfortunately I did not find it interesting and relevant to literature.
Even if the introduction is well-written and interesting, I do not believe that the topic could capture the interest of readers. The is not explanation about the questions used or about what researches observed in the captain, or about the sports authors considered. So, it makes very difficult to follow and understand the results.
Finally, a sample composed by 17 people it is too small. In my opinion, they could be okay for a preliminary study.
Author Response
Dear Referee,
In addition to being a being with a very complex physiological system and psychological processes integrated with this system, human is a sociological creatures in terms of communication with other people in the social field. It is a problematic approach to try to understand such a complex structure with purely quantitative and empirical findings or to argue that every human being is a set of generalizable principles. It was thought that it would be more appropriate to explain the human being with a holistic approach, considering the ever-changing emotional, thought and mental structure and the complexity of his response to dynamic relationships in the social field (Merriam & Grenier, 2019). Cresswell (2002) reports that a positivist or single point of view misleads the scientist in the explanation of any phenomenon, however, more precise measurements can be made by putting multiple perspectives to work. In this positivist approach, a human is defined as a meaningful whole consisting of certain parts, and it is assumed that a clear knowledge of the whole can be obtained by examining the parts (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996).
Unlike the generalization-specific quantitative research method of the positive sciences, qualitative research focuses on the diverse and profound nature of human individual characteristics. In this context, qualitative research, which defends the claim that the depth and originality of knowledge is important rather than generalizations, focuses on deep and specific data obtained from smaller study groups rather than large samples.
Despite the nature of quantitative research that requires working with evidence-seeking identity and large sample groups, qualitative research is conducted with small samples or small study groups (Marshall, 1996; Teddlie & Yu, 2007). Keeping the sample size low provides the researcher with the opportunity to examine in detail and in-depth with specific samples while making it easier to conduct executable research in terms of time and cost. (Kvale, 1994; Pope, Ziebland, ve Mays, 2006). In addition, while the researcher employs his/her own experiences with an interpretative and critical approach in the analysis of qualitative data, the analysis of quantitative research is mostly far from the researcher's feelings and thoughts, diagnostic and generalizable (Sandelowski, 1986).
Rather than the generalization-based and majority-emphasis sampling methods of quantitative research, qualitative research focuses on the details of a particular sample. Although there are different sampling methods in qualitative research, it is generally tried to reach the examples that will allow the best explanation of the researched subject and will make the best contribution to the solution of the research problem.
Qualitative research, which is usually carried out with small groups and small samples, can be repeated on the same sample group at certain times to increase data quality (Neuman & Robson, 2014). The generalization-based nature of quantitative research necessitates the need for large and large samples to represent the population. However, qualitative research does not need large and large samples, as it is mostly conducted based on observation and interviews; because after a certain stage, both observations and interviews will start to repeat themselves (Morse, 2016; Shenton, 2004). When the researcher encounters repetitions, he should realize that the data has reached saturation, and he should understand that he needs to elaborate on the data rather than diversify it. In this case, the researcher should either provide data diversity by adding new questions to the research questions or try to produce different meanings from the data he collects in order to analyze the interviews in more detail (Silverman, 2016).
As stated in the literature, team captains have important effects on the success of sports teams. Captaincy, which has such important effects on a team, expresses a process with its beginning and end. This process, on the other hand, consists of stages as we mentioned in our study. We, on the other hand, have presented a study to the coaches who will determine the team captain, explaining this process in depth and discussing each stage in detail.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Strengths:
The topic of the article is an interesting one, considering the fact that it is approached from the perspective of the five aspects.
Weaknesses:
Questions for authors:
1. What is the relevance of the responses of sports participants in individual sports (the title refers to team sports)?
2. Because the age range of the participants is quite large (25-55 years), were different perceptions found according to age?
3. Given the small number of participants (17), are there any limitations to the study/research?
Author Response
1-"What is the relevance of the responses of sports participants in individual sports (the title refers to team sports)?"
Dear referee,
There is no mention of a study that will be validated separately for team captainship in individual and team sports. The title is not stated as "team sports", on the contrary, it is expressed as "sports teams". Sports teams include both individual and team sports.
2. "Because the age range of the participants is quite large (25-55 years), were different perceptions found according to age?"
Dear referee, in our study, we have obtained findings that the team captain should be older and more experienced than the other players, and these findings are also included in the study. The perceptions of the participants according to the age variable are in this direction. (Please check lines 201st and 202nd).
3. "Given the small number of participants (17), are there any limitations to the study/research?"
Dear Referee,
In addition to being a being with a very complex physiological system and psychological processes integrated with this system, human is a sociological creatures in terms of communication with other people in the social field. It is a problematic approach to try to understand such a complex structure with purely quantitative and empirical findings or to argue that every human being is a set of generalizable principles. It was thought that it would be more appropriate to explain the human being with a holistic approach, considering the ever-changing emotional, thought and mental structure and the complexity of his response to dynamic relationships in the social field (Merriam & Grenier, 2019). Cresswell (2002) reports that a positivist or single point of view misleads the scientist in the explanation of any phenomenon, however, more precise measurements can be made by putting multiple perspectives to work. In this positivist approach, a human is defined as a meaningful whole consisting of certain parts, and it is assumed that a clear knowledge of the whole can be obtained by examining the parts (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996).
Unlike the generalization-specific quantitative research method of the positive sciences, qualitative research focuses on the diverse and profound nature of human individual characteristics. In this context, qualitative research, which defends the claim that the depth and originality of knowledge is important rather than generalizations, focuses on deep and specific data obtained from smaller study groups rather than large samples.
Despite the nature of quantitative research that requires working with evidence-seeking identity and large sample groups, qualitative research is conducted with small samples or small study groups (Marshall, 1996; Teddlie & Yu, 2007). Keeping the sample size low provides the researcher with the opportunity to examine in detail and in-depth with specific samples while making it easier to conduct executable research in terms of time and cost. (Kvale, 1994; Pope, Ziebland, ve Mays, 2006). In addition, while the researcher employs his/her own experiences with an interpretative and critical approach in the analysis of qualitative data, the analysis of quantitative research is mostly far from the researcher's feelings and thoughts, diagnostic and generalizable (Sandelowski, 1986).
Rather than the generalization-based and majority-emphasis sampling methods of quantitative research, qualitative research focuses on the details of a particular sample. Although there are different sampling methods in qualitative research, it is generally tried to reach the examples that will allow the best explanation of the researched subject and will make the best contribution to the solution of the research problem. Qualitative research, which is usually carried out with small groups and small samples, can be repeated on the same sample group at certain times to increase data quality (Neuman & Robson, 2014). The generalization-based nature of quantitative research necessitates the need for large and large samples to represent the population. However, qualitative research does not need large and large samples, as it is mostly conducted based on observation and interviews; because after a certain stage, both observations and interviews will start to repeat themselves (Morse, 2016; Shenton, 2004). When the researcher encounters repetitions, he should realize that the data has reached saturation, and he should understand that he needs to elaborate the data rather than diversify it. In this case, the researcher should either provide data diversity by adding new questions to the research questions or try to produce different meanings from the data he collects in order to analyze the interviews in more detail (Silverman, 2016).
As stated in the literature, team captains have important effects on the success of sports teams. Captaincy, which has such important effects on a team, expresses a process with its beginning and end. This process, on the other hand, consists of stages as we mentioned in our study. We, on the other hand, have presented a study to the coaches who will determine the team captain, explaining this process in depth and discussing each stage in detail.
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors,
Fidelity: At a time interval, the application of the research tool is repeated on the same sample, subsequently the results obtained being compared with those obtained at the first application, by means of the correlation coefficient. Thus, how much the higher it is, the more accurate the measuring tool is. It is generally considered that a coefficient of correlation greater than 0.70 between responses to the first and second application indicates high fidelity of the instrument.
The problem regarding the assurance of validity arises both in relation to measurement procedures and in relation to qualitative research, only that in the case of measurement it mostly refers to the evaluation of research instruments and here, measurement is missing. If validity can be easily explained, fidelity must be calculated quantitatively and mandatory in a qualitative research.
I suggest calculating the correlation index to check the instrument's fidelity.
Author Response
Dear Referee,
The final stage of qualitative data analysis is the validation of the findings. Confirmation of findings can be accomplished by testing and validating the results obtained (Merriam, 1998). At this point, the researcher should return to the research data and check the coding of the data (Miles & Huberman, 1994). After controlling the codes, categories, themes, and all other stages, the level of representation of the data set included in the analysis of the results obtained as a result of the qualitative data analysis can be determined (Poggenpoel & Myburgh, 2003). At this point, it is impossible for the researcher to make a coding that is free of individual influence. In order to cope with such a situation, it is important to code the same data set by different encoders. As a general rule, the similarity rate of the data set coded by different coders is important. This similarity rate also determines the reliability of qualitative research. This similarity, called internal consistency in the Miles and Huberman model and conceptualized as consensus among coders, can be calculated using the formula ∆= ∁ ÷ (∁ + ∂) ×100. In the formula, ∆ : Reliability coefficient, ∁ : Number of subjects/terms on which consensus is reached, ∂: Number of subjects/terms on which there is no consensus. According to the coding control, which gives internal consistency, the consensus among coders is expected to be at least 80% (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Patton, 2002).
So the validity and reliability analyzes of the data obtained in our research were carried out by calculating according to the formula of Miles and Huberman (1994), (Please check lines 144-151).
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Please report the image only once.
Reviewer 2 Report
As a former professional player and team captain, I find the topic very interesting. Unfortunately, the answers received from the authors following the requests made, showed that we do not share the same opinion. As a result, I propose to have the article peer-reviewed.
Reviewer 3 Report
I thank the authors for the corrections and for their ability to self-evaluate, but it is necessary to combine the qualitative analysis with the quantitative one, as was suggested.
