運(yùn)動(dòng)可以促進(jìn)新陳代謝、幫助骨骼發(fā)育、增加心肌力量、減少癌癥發(fā)生, 同時(shí)可以鍛煉人的意志、舒緩緊張的情緒和釋放壓力。本期《刊·見》欄目，為您介紹運(yùn)動(dòng)科學(xué)一區(qū)高品質(zhì)期刊Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health ，同時(shí)我們精選了刊內(nèi)高被引和2022高閱讀量文章，供諸位閱讀：

Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 是第一本專門致力于在體育和運(yùn)動(dòng)心理學(xué)、體育社會(huì)學(xué)、體育教練以及體育和運(yùn)動(dòng)醫(yī)學(xué)領(lǐng)域推進(jìn)和討論定性研究的國際期刊。該期刊為體育、運(yùn)動(dòng)和健康方面的研究人員提供一個(gè)交流平臺(tái)，使研究人員、從業(yè)人員和學(xué)生能夠接觸到前沿的實(shí)證研究、學(xué)術(shù)對(duì)話以及定性方法和手段的最新發(fā)展。

Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 對(duì)所有的定性方法開放，其目的是在內(nèi)容上不拘一格。發(fā)表使用定性方法的原創(chuàng)性實(shí)證研究，以及定性綜合集成和有關(guān)定性研究方法和方法論的綜述。此外，該期刊已被SCIE, SSCI, Scopus, EBSCO, CABI, ProQuest等國際知名數(shù)據(jù)庫收錄。

展開剩余 93 %

訪問期刊主頁：http://985.so/mmjwm

影響因子：

根據(jù)JCR顯示，Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health2021年影響因子為7.591

CiteScore：

Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 的

根據(jù)Scopus顯示，Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 在

中科院分區(qū)：

Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 在2022年12月中科院期刊分區(qū)表（升級(jí)版） 發(fā)布顯示：

編輯團(tuán)隊(duì)

Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 的主編由Kerry R. McGannon（加拿大勞倫森大學(xué)）和Michael Atkinson（加拿大多倫多大學(xué)）共同擔(dān)任。期刊顧問委員會(huì)成員由Brett Smith（英國杜倫大學(xué)）、Andrew Sparkes（英國利茲貝克特大學(xué)）、Vikki Krane（美國鮑林格林州立大學(xué)）共同組成。

作者分布

根據(jù)JCR顯示，近三年在Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 發(fā)文的國家中，發(fā)文活躍的國家有：

近三年，在Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health發(fā)文的全球高校和科研機(jī)構(gòu)中，發(fā)文活躍的機(jī)構(gòu)有：

期刊近三年內(nèi)高被引文章

所有的推薦文章，歡迎通過下方鏈接閱讀全文，并下載

http://985.so/mmjwd

To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales

飽和還是不飽和？質(zhì)疑數(shù)據(jù)飽和度作為主題分析和樣本量基本原理的有用概念

作者：Virginia Braun & Victoria Clarke

文章摘要：

The concept of data saturation, defined as ‘information redundancy’ or the point at which no new themes or codes ‘emerge’ from data, is widely referenced in thematic analysis (TA) research in sport and exercise, and beyond. Several researchers have sought to ‘operationalise’ data saturation and provide concrete guidance on how many interviews, or focus groups, are enough to achieve some degree of data saturation in TA research. Our disagreement with such attempts to ‘capture’ data saturation for TA led us to this commentary. Here, we contribute to critical discussions of the saturation concept in qualitative research by interrogating the assumptions around the practice and procedures of TA that inform these data saturation ‘experiments’, and the conceptualisation of saturation as information redundancy. We argue that although the concepts of data-, thematic- or code-saturation, and even meaning-saturation, are coherent with the neo-positivist, discovery-oriented, meaning excavation project of coding reliability types of TA, they are not consistent with the values and assumptions of reflexive TA. We encourage sport and exercise and other researchers using reflexive TA to dwell with uncertainty and recognise that meaning is generated through interpretation of, not excavated from, data, and therefore judgements about ‘how many’ data items, and when to stop data collection, are inescapably situated and subjective, and cannot be determined (wholly) in advance of analysis.

Autoethnography: accept, revise, reject? An evaluative self reflects

自傳式民族志：接受、改進(jìn)、拒絕？評(píng)價(jià)性的自我反映

作者：Andrew C. Sparkes

文章摘要：

In this article I offer some reflections of how my evaluative self goes about passing judgement on different kinds of autoethnography. I begin by making distinctions between the autobiographical and the autoethnographic before raising questions about whether or not self-reflexive accounts of the fieldwork process can claim the title of autoethnography. Following this, I consider the lists of criteria others have made available to my evaluative self for judging analytic, evocative and performance autoethnographies. Having acknowledged the dangers and possibilities of such lists attention then turns to how my evaluative self might go about judging a selection of autoethnographies published in Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health using multiple criteria from a variety of sources. Rather than being purely a cognitive, linear and rational act the process described is messy, tentative, contingent, and deeply embodied as my evaluative self feels its way towards making certain kinds of judgement calls over others.

刊內(nèi)2022年高閱讀量文章

下載下方文章，歡迎前往：http://985.so/mmjwd

Co-production: A resource to guide co-producing research in the sport, exercise, and health sciences

聯(lián)合制作：指導(dǎo)體育、運(yùn)動(dòng)和健康科學(xué)聯(lián)合制作資源的研究

作者：Brett Smith, Oli Williams, Lydia Bone & the Moving Social Work Co-production Collective

文章摘要：

There is growing interest in co-production in the sport, exercise, and health sciences. That includes from researchers in sport and exercise physiology, public health, sports medicine, sport sociology, sport and exercise psychology, sport management, physical education, sport coaching, leisure studies, geography, and occupational therapy. Despite the disciplinary spanning interest, academic resources in our field dedicated to the complex problem of comprehensively detailing the co-production of research and taking it forward are lacking. This paper is a modest attempt to do this. Rationales outlining the need for a resource are first presented. What is meant by co-production is then attended to. An original typology is developed to illuminate different ways co-production is defined and put to use. In the typology three differing types of co-production are described: Citizens’ Contributions to Public Services; Integrated Knowledge Translation; and Equitable and Experientially-informed Research. Why researchers co-produce research, along with various challenges involved with doing it, are then offered. It is suggested that generally university structures and academic norms tend not to facilitate co-production processes. Next, working principles to promote co-production as a means to advance a participatory turn in sport, exercise, and health research are introduced. We also highlight practical options for how to co-produce research and advance various criteria for judging the quality of it. Throughout it is highlighted why qualitative researchers are well prepared to do high quality co-produced research and should be considered important collaborators for researchers without qualitative expertise intending to co-produce research. The paper closes with future directions.

A typology of co-production

Beyond life-skills: talented athletes, existential learning and (Un)learning the life of an athlete

超越生活技能：天才運(yùn)動(dòng)員、存在主義學(xué)習(xí)和（非）學(xué)習(xí)運(yùn)動(dòng)員的生活

作者：Noora Ronkainen, Kenneth Aggerholm, Jacquelyn Allen-Collinson & Tatiana V. Ryba

文章摘要：

Following developments in educational discourse more broadly, learning discourses in youth sport have been shaped by outcome-based and instrumental goals of developing useful life-skills for ‘successful’ lives. There is, however, a need to expand such traditional understandings of sport-based youth development, which we undertook by exploring existential learning in sport through encountering discontinuity. We conducted in-depth qualitative research with 16 Finnish athletes (seven men/nine women, aged 19–20), five of whom had recently disengaged from the athlete development pathway. In the interviews, we used creative non-fiction vignettes to invite reflections on learning experiences in sport. Although participants reported having learnt many useful skills commonly associated with positive youth development discourses (e.g. goal setting, time-management), many also provided rich descriptions of other, important ‘life lessons’. These involved developing awareness of their bodily limitations, the nature of social relationships, and what it was like to live the life of an elite athlete. The findings revealed problematic features of (elite) sport cultures but also showed that encountering discontinuity could be beneficial as an important trigger for existential reflection, clarification of values, and a search for alternative ways of living.

審稿周期

從提交稿件到獲取初審意見，平均需要18天

獲取首個(gè)同行評(píng)審決定，平均需要71天

稿件一旦接受后，在線出版平均需要20天

——————————————————————————————————

作者可以選擇開放獲取模式在本刊發(fā)表文章。

以上內(nèi)容可能更新，

請(qǐng)以期刊官網(wǎng)主頁為準(zhǔn)。

請(qǐng)前往期刊官網(wǎng)Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health

查看期刊最新數(shù)據(jù)和投稿詳情！