Análisis de estructuras de triada y su viabilidad como juegos motores

  1. Pic Aguilar, Miguel
  1. Vicente Navarro Adelantado Zuzendaria
  2. Heriberto Jiménez Betancort Zuzendarikidea

Defentsa unibertsitatea: Universidad de La Laguna

Fecha de defensa: 2018(e)ko ekaina-(a)k 19

  1. Pere Lavega Burgués Presidentea
  2. Francisco Jimenez Jimenez Idazkaria
  3. Paulo Cohelo de Araujo Kidea
  1. Psicología Evolutiva y de la Educación

Mota: Tesia

Teseo: 559633 DIALNET lock_openRIULL editor


Abstract This doctoral thesis is based on the 'compendium of articles' modality. After a study of the motor triads, it justifies three coherent articles in a line of research. The triad is a collective organization with specific consequences when it acts as a triad motor game. In the triad, ambivalent social relations are activated that tend towards a balance of forces, with the coalition being a phenomenon with strategic consequences. The motor triads make up a census of 13 types with complete connections or with the absence of a connection between two of their three nodes. When connecting the teams there are several fluctuations of the forces that motivate the appearance of paradoxical situations, despite the fact that some types of triads are less favored in their connections and flows. This work uses as a model persecution games with confrontation of teams, which allows the forecast of situations (first part of this document) and the verification of the relevance of the strategic decision through observation (second part of the document, third article). The work presented consists of two parts. In the first part, a theoretical and methodological analysis of the triads based on motor praxiology is carried out, with the support of graph theory, in a context of communication of social relations, and also of the criterion of utility for decisions, according to the strategic preference; all this to understand the behavior of the types of motor triads and their gameplay. Two levels of analysis are studied, from the communication network and its flows, and from the role, through indicators of communication (emissions and receptions, intragroup and intergroup interactions, positive and negative valences). In the second part, a structured summary of the issues addressed in the three published articles is presented; the first two articles are justified by the advances of the first part, and the third publication takes advantage of these previous advances, testing, through observational methodology, the differences between types of triads and their T-patterns. Motor triads refer to three properties (circulation, transitivity, interactivity) capable of disturbing the strategy with which the game is faced. The result of these triadic premises leads to an optimal playability. Thus, the census triads are playable under certain conditions, (opening of the rule that does not limit the triadic relation, considering the adaptation of the achievement according to the initial disposition of a team with respect to its strength in emissions and receptions). In the first article, four triad games are comparatively studied from a motor communication perspective, with the purpose of measuring their differences and showing with concrete games the viability of the triad games. The second article is based on the problem that, in the practice of triad motor games, players can not always experience the paradox from the decisional point of view, due to the speed of the actions and the lack of awareness to exercise the coalition. The game 'Allied Ball' is a playful design that regulates the paradoxical situation and makes it evident to the players, while adjusting the balance of antagonism against solidarity. The third article is based on previous studies, undertaking an empirical study using observational methodology; we compare two sets of triadic census motor (structures 1 and 2) practiced by different groups of physical education students through the application of the data reduction technique T-patterns. The results showed greater strategic complexity in structure 1 ('Labyrinth', modified) than in structure 2 ('Three fields', modified). The differences between the two structures of triads come from their systemic and communicational properties, and from the itineraries identified by Theme, with greater decisional breadth in structure 1 compared to structure 2, which is smaller.