Comparison of Doping Knowledge Levels of Two Different University Learning Students


Comparison of Doping Knowledge Levels of Two Different University Learning Students


2A,Vahit DOĞAR, 1Metin BAYRAM, 2Kenan ŞEBİN, 1Gökhan BAYRAKTAR, 1Serkan T.AKA  
1Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen University of Physical Education and Sports High School AĞRI/TÜRKİYE
2Atatürk University excavation education faculty physical education and sports department ERZURUM/TÜRKİYE


American journal of educational research and reviewsThe aim of this study was to determine the doping knowledge levels of the students of Ağrı İbrahim Chechen University School of Physical Education and Sports and Atatürk University Faculty of Education Physical Education and Sports Teaching Department. Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen University 200 students studying at the School of Physical Education and Sports 334 students studying at the Department of Physical Education and Sports Teaching at Ataturk University Faculty of Education have been applied and a total of 534 questionnaires have been evaluated. The scope validity, comprehensibility and reliability of the questionnaire consisting of 32 questionnaires in order to determine the level of doping information was made by enthusiasm and cronbach alpha reliability coefficient in the 2006-2007 school year was determined as 0.92. (0.80 <x <1.00), the data collection tool is highly reliable. Information obtained from the questionnaire The frequency and percentage values were taken in the SPSS 16.0 package program. The frequency and percentage distribution of the demographic characteristics of the students participating in the survey and the results of the chi-square test to determine the relationship between the independent variables and the opinions related to the use of doping.


Keywords: Doping,, Knowledge level, Ergogenic helpers

Free Full-text PDF


How to cite this article:
A,Vahit DOĞAR, Metin BAYRAM, Kenan ŞEBİN, Gökhan BAYRAKTAR, Serkan T.AKA. Comparison of Doping Knowledge Levels of Two Different University Learning Students. American Journal of Educational Research and Reviews, 2017,2:7. DOI: 10.28933/ajerr-2017-11-0305


References:

1 Açıkada C, Ergen, Spor ve Bilim.Büro-Tek Ofset Matbaacılık,Ankara 1990.
2 Akgün N, Egzersiz Fizyolojisi.Ege Üniversitesi Basım Evi,İzmir, 1993.
3 Aral, S., Brynjolfsson, E., & Wu, D. J. (2006). Which came first, it or productivity? Virtuous cycle of investment and use in enterprise systems
4 Bayram M, Bayraktar,G, Tozoğlu E,, Doğar A.V. (2017) Beden Eğitimi Ve Spor Öğretmenlerinin Doping Bilgi Düzeylerinin Belirlenmesi
5 Bozkurt, N., Bozkurt, A. İ., Taş, E., & Çatak, B. (2006). Denizli il merkezinde 15 yaş ve üzeri nüfusta astım prevalansı. Toraks Dergisi, 7(1), 5-10.
6 Çetinkaya, G., Ağyar, E., Dilbaz, K., Ö. Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Yüksekokullarındaki Öğrencilerin Doping Konusundaki Bilgi Düzeyleri ve Tutumlarının İncelenmesi (Akdeniz Üniversitesi Örneği). 4. Akdeniz Spor Bilimleri Kongresi, Antalya, 9-11 Kasım2007.
7 Eröz F, Milli Düzeyde, Atletizm, Güreş, Judo ve Halter Yapan Sporcuların Doping ve Ergojenik Yardım HakkındakiGörüşlerinin ve Bilgi Düzeylerinin Belirlenmesi, Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Beden Eğitimive Spor Anabilim Dalı Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Kütahya,2007.
8 Gençtürk G, Colakoglu T & Demirel M (2009). Elit Sporcularda Doping Bilgi Düzeyinin Ölçülmesine Yönelik Bir Araştırma (Güreş Örneği). Beden Egitimi Ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(3).
9 http://sln.fi.edu/ Erişim tarihi 01.14.2017
10 http://www.tdkm.hacettepe.edu.tr.Erişim tarihi 01.14.2017
11 http://www.tdkm.hacettepe.edu.trErişimtarihi01.14.2017 http://www.uoregon.edu/~iishp/Vannat.html.Erişim tarihi 01.14.2017
12 http://www.wada-ama.org/Erişim tarihi 01.14.2017
13 Kalyon T.A, Spor Hekimliği,Sporcu Sağlığı ve Spor Sakatlığı. 2. Baskı,GATA Basımevi,Ankara.1994
14 Kurdak S. S, Sporda Doping ve İlaç Kullanımı, Sporsal Kuram Dizisi-7, Yazarın Kendi Yayını, 1.Bası, Ankara,1996
15 Miller, R.W., ”Athletes and Steroids: Playing a Deadly Game,” FDA Consumer, November 1987.
16 National Institute on Drug Abuse, ”anabolic Steroids: Is Bigger Better or Just Big Trouble?,” NIDA Notes, Spring /Summer 1989.
17 Öztürk EG, Suveren S & Çolakoğlu T (2012). Doping in Turkey, assessment of knowledge level of players about doping (handball study case). International Journal of Human Sciences, 9(1), 249-260.
18 Stehlin, D., ”For Athletes and Dealers, Black Marcet Steroids Are Risky Business,” FDA Consumer, 1987.
19 Temizer A, Doping Kontrolünde Gelişmeler ve Türkiye. Bilim ve Teknik Dergisi, 321, Agustos.1994.
20 Yalnız, İ., Gündüz, N. Ankara İlinde Vücut Geliştirme Branşında Faaliyet Gösteren Sporcuların Ergojenin Yardımcılar Konusunda Bilgi ve Uygulama Düzeyleri. Gazi Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt:9, Sayı:2, Ankara, 2004, s.21-23.
21 Yuce, H. H., Varachi Jr, J. P., Kilmer, J. P., Kurkjian, C. R., & Matthewson, M. J. (1992, February). Optical fiber corrosion: coating contribution to zero-stress aging. In OFC (Vol. 92,