Table 2.

Comparison of performance coefficients and efficiency stratified by set outcome and set score difference.

Performance indicators	Winner						Loser						Two-way ANOVA(Interaction)
	LD (n = 9)		MD (n = 25)		SD (n = 45)		LD (n = 9)		MD (n = 25)		SD (n = 45)
	Mean	SD(±)	Mean	SD(±)	Mean	SD(±)	Mean	SD(±)	Mean	SD(±)	Mean	SD(±)
PC serve	1.81a	0.21	1.64a	0.39	1.47	0.35	1.27	0.35	1.32	0.39	1.39	0.37	F(2.00, 152.00) = 3.798; p = 0.025; ηρ2 = 0.048
PC serve reception	2.48a	0.37	2.43a	0.38	2.35	0.35	2.09	0.20	2.15	0.30	2.32	0.31	F(2.00, 152.00) = 3.533; p = 0.032; ηρ2 = 0.044
PC set	2.68	0.39	2.81a	0.27	2.78	0.31	2.56	0.40	2.39	0.37	2.65	0.35	F(2.00, 152.00) = 3.293; p = 0.040; ηρ2 = 0.042
PC attack	3.09a	0.55	2.97a	0.43	2.84a	0.41	1.96	0.17	2.26	0.40	2.60	0.42	F(2.00, 152.00) = 10.975; p < 0.001; ηρ2 = 0.126
PC blockb	1.94	0.75	1.84	0.71	1.77	0.70	0.83	0.78	1.33	0.92	1.33	0.92	F(2.00, 151.00) = 2.361; p = 0.098; ηρ2 = 0.030
PC digb	2.16	0.36	2.06	0.49	1.98	0.35	1.53	0.55	1.74	0.37	1.76	0.48	F(2.00, 152.00) = 1.723; p = 0.182; ηρ2 = 0.022
PC set (CT)b	2.25	0.26	2.48	0.43	2.37	0.36	1.89	0.70	2.31	0.48	2.32	0.41	F(2.00, 152.00) = 1.070; p = 0.346; ηρ2 = 0.014
PC attack (CT)b	2.86	0.45	2.88	0.46	2.69	0.60	2.15	0.94	2.32	0.95	2.53	0.69	F(2.00, 152.00) = 2.071; p = 0.130; ηρ2 = 0.027
EFF attack	49.81a	19.30	53.18a	18.32	45.19	18.89	04.80	14.50	21.77	15.23	32.89	14.92	F(2.00, 152.00) = 9.730; p < 0.001; ηρ2 = 0.113*
EFF attack (CA)b	53.06	16.20	50.20	21.58	40.78	22.88	21.98	33.90	26.98	37.78	31.69	29.27	F(2.00, 152.00) = 1.780; p = 0.172; ηρ2 = 0.023

PC, performance coefficient; EFF, efficiency; CA, counterattack; SD, standard deviation; η_ρ², partial eta squared; LD, large difference; MD, medium difference; SD, short difference.

^a Statistically significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) between the winning and losing teams in terms of the set score difference (LD, MD, SD).

^b Statistically significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) between the winner vs. loser teams.

^*p ≤ 0.05.