Coach athlete relationship and motivation

coach athlete relationship and motivation

of perceptions belonging to motivation in sports. That the perceptions regarding task and ego orientations of athletes and coach-athlete relationship explain %77 . revealed closeness, one of the coach-athlete relationship markers, to be a . psychological outcomes such as stress, motivation, and self-efficacy (Jowett &. The purpose of this study was to determine the correlation between coach- athlete relationship and motivation among UiTM Shah Alam athletes.

The quality of the relationship between an athlete and his or her coach is therefore very important. As such, enhancing our understanding of the coach—athlete relationship may have important implications for maximizing sporting and psychological outcomes among both players and coaches Nicholls and Perry, There are three theoretical models that specifically attempted to conceptualize the coach—athlete relationship.

These were proposed by Poczwardowski et al. Complementarity is the degree to which the behaviors of the athlete and coach relate to one another. Co-orientation represents the extent to which the athlete and coach have established common views on sporting and non-sporting matters. Closeness refers to the extent to which the athlete and coach care, support, and value each other. Finally, commitment relates to whether the athlete and coach intend to maintain their relationship. Jowett purported that the coach—athlete relationship is dynamic as both the coach and the athlete can influence the relationship and that it changes over time.

The coach-athlete relationship: a motivational model | Geneviève Mageau -

LaVoi identified four main components in the coach—athlete relationship e. Finally, Poczwardowski et al. At the present time, however, only Jowett developed a questionnaire to accompany her model Jowett and Ntoumanis,whereas, Lavoi and Poczwardowski are yet to create a questionnaire. The questionnaire by Jowett and Ntoumanis is widely used across different populations and is a valid measure of this construct, so we felt it was appropriate her framework and questionnaire.

To our knowledge, scholars are yet to explore the extent to which the coach—athlete relationship changes over time. As such, the first purpose of this study was to address this gap in the literature and examine whether perceptions of the coach—athlete relationship changed over a period of 6 months.

Although little is known about how the coach—athlete relationship may change over time, there is an association between this construct and achievement goals. Adie and Jowett examined the extent to which mastery-approach i.

coach athlete relationship and motivation

They revealed that athletes who perceived a closer and more committed relationship with their coach were more likely to adopt mastery-approach goals, but less likely to adopt mastery-avoidance goals.

These findings were echoed by Isoard-Gautheur et al. There is also evidence that links goals with how an athlete evaluates stress Nicholls et al. Athletes who adopt mastery-approach goals are more likely to view stressful situations as challenging, whereas athletes who endorse mastery-avoidance or performance-avoidance are more likely to experience threat when in stressful situations Nicholls et al.

Further, athletes who use goal re-engagement strategies are likely to experience challenge states, whereas goal disengagement strategies are more likely to generate threat appraisals Nicholls et al.

Scholarly activity by Lochbaum and Smith revealed that mastery-approach goals are associated with superior performance in golf. As such, the coach—athlete relationship may be associated with sporting performance, via achievement goals. Sport psychology researchers reported a link between the coach—athlete relationship and sporting performance.

For example, Jowett and Cockerill interviewed 12 Olympic medalists regarding their experiences of the coach—athlete relationship. Findings revealed that the quality of the coach—athlete relationship was instrumental in helping the athletes perform well and thus win an Olympic medal.

Bo Hanson on the Coach Athlete Relationship

Other scholars examined this relationship via quantitative research designs. Mata and Da Silva Gomes examined the relationship between perceptions of coach—athlete relationship quality and goal achievement among two teams that won the most prestigious professional volleyball competitions e.

Login using

The volleyball players who won a medal perceived that they were closer and more committed to their coaches than the non-medalists. It should be noted that the association between the coach—athlete relationship and sports performance is yet to be tested longitudinally.

Assessing this relationship longitudinally will allow scholars to assess the predictive powers of the coach—athlete relationship. The second purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between the coach—athlete relationship and goal achievement. The aim of this study was to quantitatively assess some of the theoretical and empirical assertions made by Jowett Firstly, we assessed whether the coach—athlete relationship changed over six months, from Time 1 T1 to Time 2 T2.

We also examined whether the coach—athlete relationship was associated with goal achievement at the initial measurement and whether perception of the coach—athlete relationship predicted goal achievement six months later. In accordance with existing research e. Materials and Methods Participants One-hundred and four male F. Other scholars reported satisfactory psychometric properties for this measure including construct and factorial validity, criterion validity, and internal consistency e.

Moreover, previous studies also provided support for the use of an overall coach—athlete relationship score and used this measure among similar samples to the present study e. Moreover, these studies provided support for the use of an overall score and used this measure with similar samples to those in the present study e. Following approval, we purposively sampled F. Premier League academy players within one academy by distributing information letters, consent forms, and assent forms to all players within the academy, with the aim of recruiting as many players as possible.

We obtained informed consent from all participants aged 18 years and over, informed assent from players aged 17 years and below, and parental consent from all players who were aged 17 years and below. There are two lead coaches in the Foundation phase, two in the youth development phases, and five coaches in the professional development phase.

We did not ask participants to identify the coach the completed the questionnaire about, because we thought that participants might less inclined to provide honest answers, but the players were instructed to complete the questionnaire in regards to the same coach at T1 and T2. In total, players completed T1 and 52 players completed both T1 and T2 assessments.

Of the players who completed the assessments at T1, 35 players were released, 12 players were injured, five players were on loan at another club, and two players had joined another club when the T2 assessments occurred. All of the players absent from the academy during T2 assessments were sent questionnaires to their home address in stamped address envelope, but only two players returned the questionnaires.

Other than these two players, all participants completed the questionnaires in the presence of Keith Earle, who is a Health and Care Professions Council Registered Psychologist. Keith Earle was present to answer any questions the athletes had and to clarify the meaning of the questions if the players struggled to comprehend them. Data Screening Firstly, we inspected the data for missing values.

Finally, following recommendations by Tabachnick and Fidellwe screened data for multivariate outliers. As previous research by Jowett did not find that age was a significant moderator between the coach—athlete relationship and self-concept among academy players of a similar age, we did not analyze the data based on age group categories. Data Analysis To examine the associations between the coach—athlete relationship and goal achievement, we firstly examined bivariate Pearson correlations between all variables.

This also allowed us to investigate the stability of the coach—athlete relationship by examining the correlations between the coach—athlete relationship at T1 and T2. Next, we conducted a series of multiple regression analysis to investigate the longitudinal relationship between the coach—athlete relationship and goal achievement.

Goal achievement from T1 was entered at Step 1, to control for baseline levels of goal achievement. The coach—athlete relationship from T1 was then entered at Step 2 for which we used the composite score which is reflective of the overall coach—athlete relationship. This analysis was repeated for overall goal achievement and the three subscales of goal achievement i.

Results Bivariate Correlations We inspected the bivariate correlations between all variables see Table 1.

coach athlete relationship and motivation

As expected, the subscales of both the coach—athlete relationship and goal achievement showed strong inter-correlations within waves. Moreover, Table 1 shows that the coach—athlete relationship remained relatively stable between T1 and T2, as indicated by T1-T2 correlations of 0. Finally, the results show the coach—athlete relationship overall score and all sub-scale scores was associated with achievement mastery goals, both cross-sectionally 0.

The coach—athlete relationship, however, did not correlate with self-referenced or normative goal achievement.

There was a problem providing the content you requested

Multiple Regression Analyses We then conducted a series of multiple regression analyses see Table 2. Results showed that the coach—athlete relationship predicted residual increases in the achievement of mastery goals over time. Summary of regression analyses predicting goal achievement at T2. Discussion The aim of this paper was to explore whether perceptions of the coach—athlete relationship changed over six months and if the coach—athlete relationship predicted goal achievement among F.

Premier League academy soccer players. Our prediction that the coach—athlete relationship would change across the six months was not supported. The players perceived that the quality of their coach—athlete relationship remained relatively stable. Level of significance was determined to be. Meta-perceptions of the coach-athlete relationship, achievement goals, and intrinsic motivation among sport participants.

Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40, Evaluating the Coach-Athlete Relationship: Validity and Reliability Study. Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 23 3 The independent and interactive effects of coach, father, and mother autonomy support. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 26, Coach autonomy support, basic need satisfaction, and intrinsic motivation of paralympic athletes.

Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 82 4 Optimising physical activity engagement during youth sport: Journal of sports sciences, How perceived autonomy support from adults and peer motivational climate are related with self-determined motivation among young athletes.

International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,13 3 Associations between the perceived quality of the coach—athlete relationship and athlete burnout: An examination of the mediating role of achievement goals. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 22, Psychology of Sport and Exercise,13 3 ,