Purpose This study aimed to assess the importance of performance psychological factors (PPF) among Korean and Chinese football experts (FE) and to identify differences in their judgments regarding PPF. Methods In this study, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was conducted with 60 participants, including Ph.D. holders in sports psychology with player experience and football coaches with over 10 years of combined experience as players, coaches, and researchers. The standardized scores from the AHP results were used to determine the differences in judgments regarding the importance of PPF between the two countries. Results First, Korean FE make judgments on the importance of PPF in the order of factors such as game intelligence and fundamentals, and in the subfactors, practical intelligence, anxiety control, and confidence. Second, Chinese FE make judgments on the importance of PPF in the order of factors such as fundamentals and game intelligence, and in the subfactors, practical intelligence, confidence, and fighting spirit. Third, PPF judged by Korean FE range from confidence (0.050), which is the closest, to pressure control (0.792), which is the farthest. PPF judged by Chinese FE range from analyzing abilities (0.106), the closest, to fighting spirit (0.919), the farthest. Conclusions The differences in judgments regarding the importance of PPF in Korean and Chinese FE may reflect varying evaluations of psychological factors influenced by each country's football culture. Overall, this study can serve as a resource for mutual understanding and communication between the two countries.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Ji-Hun Kang
Kongju National University
Hsien-Hui Tang
National Taiwan University of Science and Technology
Frontiers in Psychology
Shandong First Medical University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Kang et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/68e585d0b1e78cc4e5f46636 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1659102