Exploration of the Impact of Coaching Behaviors on Female Collegiate Athletes: A Study of Self-confidence, Mental Errors and Performance

A Synthesis of the Research Literature

A Synthesis Project

Presented to the

Department of Kinesiology, Sport Studies, and Physical Education

The College at Brockport

State University of New York

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Science in Education

(Athletic Administration)

By

Tiye Q. Davis

December 14, 2016

THE COLLEGE AT BROCKPORT

STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK

BROCKPORT, NEW YORK

Department of Kinesiology, Sport Studies, and Physical Education

Title of Synthesis Project:

Exploration of the Impact of Coaching Behaviors on Female Collegiate Athletes:

A study of Performance, Self-Confidence and Mental Errors

A Synthesis of the Research Literature

Read and Approved by:

Date: December 14, 2016

Accepted by the Department of Kinesiology, Sport Studies, and Physical Education, The College at Brockport, State University of New York, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science in Education (Physical Education).

Date: _________________ ________________________________ Dr. Cathy Houston-Wilson

Chairperson, Department of Kinesiology, Sport Studies, and Physical Education

2

Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………4 Chapter 1…………………………………………………………………………………………..5 Chapter 2…………………………………………………………………………………………10 Chapter 3…………………………………………………………………………………………14 Chapter 4…………………………………………………………………………………………35 Chapter 5…………………………………………………………………………………………46 References………………………………………………………………………………………..48 Appendix A – Synthesis Article Grid……………………………………………………………50

3

Abstract

This synthesis explores the impact of coaching behaviors on female collegiate athletes.

Specifically, it examines self-confidence and mental errors in relation to performance. Thirteen

articles, which included a total of 1,917 participants, of which 695 were female collegiate

athletes, were reviewed and synthesized to answer six research questions, to identify a gap in the

literature. While both mental errors and self-confidence levels are influenced by coaching

behaviors, there is little evidence to prove a relationship exists between self-confidence and

mental errors. The dimensions of an interdependent relationship are represented as variables of

the “Triangle of Effects”; they are examined through previously employed tools such as the

Coaching Behavior Questionnaire, the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory, the Coach-Athlete

Questionnaire, the Sport Motivation Scale, and two qualitative measures: interviewing and

journaling. This research concludes that there is a need for further examination of the

relationship between coaching behaviors, self-confidence and mental errors, in order to enhance

the coach-athlete relationship and increase self-confidence, which will ultimately reduce mental

errors in athletes.

Keywords & key phrases used in search:

self-confidence, coaching behaviors, mental errors, sport anxiety, performance, collegiate

athletes, female collegiate athletes

4

Chapter 1

Introduction

It is well understood that the interactions between coaches and their athletes have a

significant bearing on the coach-athlete relationship. What may be more interesting is the

influence coaching-behaviors have on an athletes’ perceptions of effective coaching. More

specifically, what impact do the perceived effective or ineffective, coaching behaviors have on

an athletes’ self-confidence, mental errors and performance?

Coaching behaviors can be defined as actions and/or exhibitions of behaviors that may

have a negative or positive influence on athletes by the coach (Kenow & Williams, 1992). Self-

confidence affects the way one feels, thinks and behaves while mental errors are thoughts that

occur during competition, usually negative, which lead to physical errors, essentially the error is

mental. Manifestations of anxiety have been shown to have negative effects on performance, as

well as interrupt the perception of the relationship between an athlete and a coach (Baker, Cotê

& Hawes, 2000). Negative behaviors can be perceived as physical or verbal exhibitions i.e.,

throwing chairs during contests, or breaking a clip board, or swearing directly at a player. An

extreme example of verbal aggressiveness or abuse was found in Ruggerio & Lattin (2008)

where a coach intentionally diminished a female collegiate athletes’ worth as an individual by

saying “You need brain surgery. You are so stupid, dumb and nothing but a little shit”. On the

other hand, positive coaching behaviors may be perceived as a high five when a player is subbed

out or verbally making a positive statement to an individual in front of the team, such as “Your

quick thinking led to a great play, Maria”. Coaches’ attempts to exhibit positive behaviors gives

a coach the opportunity to create positive learning environments for their athletes, thereby

5

maximizing opportunities for improved self-confidence and decreasing instances of anxiety

induced errors.

Gaps in literature show there is a need for more thorough examination of the coach-

athlete relationship and its influencing variables, whether they are positive or negative. Previous

research raises questions regarding whether there is a relationship between coaching behaviors

and athlete self-confidence and mental errors during competition.

While few studies have researched the effect of self-confidence and mental errors, there

is reason to believe that coaching behaviors have an effect on mental errors as well as an effect

on self-confidence levels, therefore the three are related and perhaps interdependent. While both

mental errors and self-confidence levels are influenced by coaching behaviors, there has been

little evidence to prove there is a relationship between self-confidence and mental errors.

This idea can be conceptualized as the workings of a triangle, in this synthesis referred to

as the “Triangle of Effects”. One focal point would be the coach’s behaviors and the other two

focal points would be self-confidence and mental errors. As studied by Kenow and Williams

(1992), in their analysis of the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire, coaches felt their emotional

outbursts during competition helped the team, whereas the team stated that those outbursts did

not serve as motivation, but as criticism and judgment, and consequently, these feelings led to

committing errors in performance. Thus, this information indicates that the “Triangle of Effects”

would not only be in need of validation, but can be used to assess performance errors. If the

Triangle of Effects represents a valid interdependence, would fewer errors would be committed

during competition? And would positive development of self-confidence occur as a result of the

coach’s positive behavior or influence toward his/her players?

6

The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between coaching behaviors, self-

confidence, and mental errors in relation to performance. Investigating the perceptions of athletes

regarding positive and negative coaching behaviors, identifying how coaches build self-

confidence in athletes and how self-confidence is related to mental errors in performance may

help athletes understand their needs and may help coaches behave in a manner that is conducive

to increasing athlete self-confidence. Studies on the interpersonal relationships between coaches

and female athletes are minimal, however, despite the fact that the number of women in

intercollegiate sports has risen since the implementation of Title IX (Ruggerio & Lattin, 2008).

Thus, showing the need for more research that directly targets the female athletic population.

Research Questions

1) What is the impact of coaching behavior on the performance of female collegiate

athletes?

2) Which coaching behaviors are perceived to be positive by female collegiate athletes?

3) Which coaching behaviors are perceived to be negative by female collegiate athletes?

4) What impact does coaching behavior have on the self-confidence of female collegiate

athletes?

5) What impact does self-confidence have on athletes’ mental errors?

6) What is the relationship between mental errors and performance?

Operational Definitions:

Coaching Behaviors – actions and/or exhibitions of behaviors that may have a negative or

positive influence on athletes by the coach (Kenow & Williams, 1992)

7

Self-confidence – the way one feels, thinks and behaves, which has an important influence upon

sport performance (Kingston, Lane & Thomas, 2010)

Sport Anxiety – explanation of the two different manifestations of anxiety on athletes, trait and

state anxiety (Baker, Cotê & Hawes, 2000)

Cognitive(State) Anxiety – refers to feelings of worry or apprehension

Trait Anxiety – a predisposition to perceive situations as potentially threatening and

respond with manifestations of state anxiety - *sometimes referred to as competitive trait

anxiety

Mental Errors – mistakes that occur during competition that are representative of

cognitive/attentional disruptions (Bird & Horn, 1990)

Triangle of Effects:

Assumptions:

1) It is assumed that not all participants in the studies were honest on surveys, in focus

groups and questionnaires.

Coaching Behaviors

Mental Errors/PerformanceSelf Confidence

8

2) It is assumed that all researchers involved in these studies upheld their duties to analyze

results without bias and confidentiality.

3) It is assumed that all transcriptions, analysis and coding were accurately recorded.

4) It is assumed that the literature was exhausted.

Delimitations:

1) All articles used have been peer reviewed.

2) All articles with the exception of three are from the year 2000 and beyond. Background

information dated as early as 1992, appears in chapter 1 only, not in the critical mass of

articles.

3) Subjects in the articles selected include females in collegiate sport.

Limitations:

1) Many of the studies list male and/or female participants, but do not share which groups

specifically yield which results, and/or the results are from mixed categories, thus making

it difficult to narrow down some studies to female athletes only.

2) Only one study explores in depth the relationship between coaching behaviors, self-

confidence and mental errors.

3) Much of the language is inconsistent, where many studies use the terms trait and state

anxiety, and others use cognitive and somatic anxiety.

9

Chapter 2

Methods

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss how the research studies were collected to

examine the relationship between coaching behaviors, self-confidence and mental errors.

Data Collection

The search to narrow the selection of the critical mass of articles began by utilizing the

SPORTDiscus database, at the State University of New York, The College at Brockport Library.

Key terms used in the initial search were combinations of “self-confidence”, “coaching

behaviors”, and “mental errors”. All searches were criteria filtered for peer review and full text.

The first result list in the search of “coaching behaviors” and “self-confidence” yielded

nine articles which included articles that are commonly referenced in current research, but

published in 1990, 1992 and 1999. It was then determined that, in order to better explain the

topic of the relationship between coaching behaviors and self-confidence, these articles could be

utilized in the introduction and discussion.

As terms were searched in a broad manner, they were interchanged, “Mental errors”,

which was yielding low findings, was replaced with “collegiate athletes” from the SportDiscus

Database via the EBSCOhost search engine. The result of “coaching behaviors” and “collegiate

athletes” yielded four articles, only one of which was viable to the study. The result of “coaching

behaviors” and “athlete self-confidence” yielded eight articles, where one was considered

appropriate for use, due to its nature of having studied the self-confidence impact of coaching

behaviors.

10

Upon reviewing the initial articles found, additional key terms became apparent in the

form of commonly referenced themes or notations from the literature. These themes included

“sport anxiety”, and “sport performance”. These terms yielded 17 and 78 articles respectively

and of these, 4 were considered for the critical mass. During the summarizing process for the

article grid, only two of the four were deemed viable for the study, as they provided research on

relationships between sport anxiety and coaching behaviors, and mental errors.

With the understanding that there was not yet enough supporting literature for use, the

PsycINFO Database was employed and the data search began with the same key terms. The

initial result list consisted of 95 articles, from a variety of academic journals. Of these articles,

key words in titles then narrowed it down to thirty that would be of possible use, and after

reviewing abstracts, only five would be considered appropriate for the critical mass due to their

contributions.

The search term “female collegiate athletes” in conjunction with “mental errors”,

“performance errors”, “sport anxiety”, “coaching behaviors” and “self-confidence”, yielded the

same articles that were already found. Therefore, the search term was not a productive agent for

the search. Many articles were deemed unfit for this synthesis, due to a lack of clarity in

participant ratios of males to females in the findings, or alternative interpretations in the

discussions.

Finally, key terms were entered into Google Scholar, where finding peer reviewed

research was somewhat more difficult, but achievable. This search yielded many studies, some

that were already collected, but allowed for elaboration on the topic. The most useful tools for

data collection were analyzing reference pages for commonly cited or applicable research, as

well as Drake Memorial Library employees, who helped navigate advanced searches, and terms

11

to gather information. Overall a total of 21 articles were collected for review, which were then

summarized into the Synthesis Article Grid (Appendix A). During the summarization ten,

articles proved to be unfit for this synthesis, as they did not answer any of the research questions,

and did not fit into the emerging themes.

The result list includes research from a variety of journals including, International

Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, The Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, The Journal of

Behavioral Sciences in Sport, The Journal of Sport Behavior, The Sport Psychologist, Journal of

Sport & Exercise Phycology, The Howard Journal of Communications, The International

Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, and The Journal of Psychology of Sport & Exercise.

Data Coding

Of the articles selected 10 were included in the critical mass, and three were designated

for supplemental background information, used only in the introduction as well as discussion

sections. Many of the articles found for the critical mass used mixed methods of data collection.

In some studies, questionnaires were administered to the participants to evaluate certain

variables, and then subjects were observed by the researcher(s). Some of the research also

included interviews and conversations with participants about their sport experiences. The total

number of participants across all articles was 1,917. Of this sample: 695 were female collegiate

athletes, 795 were male (and have been excluded from this synthesis), 86 were unspecified as

male or female, 179 were coaches. Participants of studies that evaluated both collegiate and high

school athletes, included 444, males and females.

Analysis of these articles began by utilizing the synthesis grid as a tool for identifying

key or common words and phrases. Once each article was summarized in the areas of: purpose,

12

methods, participants, analysis, findings and discussion and future research, emerging themes

across articles were evident. Breakdown of themes was based on purpose, positive or negatively

perceived coaching behaviors, the impact of coaching behaviors, sport anxiety, errors or

mistakes in competition, and high or low levels of self-confidence. From these categories,

similarities were evident where sport anxiety manifested in both trait and state anxiety. Self-

confidence was commonly found to be measured via questionnaire, differences in coach self-

perception of coaching behaviors and the impact of coaching behaviors provided a need for two

separate categories. Based on the information in the articles, a response to the research questions

was formulated.

13

Chapter 3

Review of Literature

The purpose of this chapter is to examine the existing literature regarding coaching

behaviors, self-confidence, and mental and performance errors. For purposes of this synthesis a

total of thirteen peer-reviewed articles were used. Of these, 10 ranged between the years of 2000

to 2013 and three were dated, 1990, 1992, and 1999. The information that applies to the

relationship between coaching behaviors, self-confidence, and mental and performance errors

was categorized into five groups: perceptions and impacts of coaching behaviors, positive

coaching behaviors, negative coaching behaviors with a sub-category of poor coaching, self-

confidence and mental errors, and relationships of the variables. These categories were created

based on the emergent themes in the literature, in connection with the research questions.

Perceptions and Impact of Coaching Behaviors

Researchers Horn, Bloom, Berglund and Packard (2011), conducted a study to describe

the relationship between collegiate athletes’ psychological characteristics and their preferences

for different types of coaching behaviors. With the guidance of R.E. Smith’s 1998 conceptual

model of sport anxiety, it was hypothesized that athletes who are high in competitive trait anxiety

may prefer coaches who are socially supportive, responding to athlete performances with

positive and encouraging responses, rather than critical or punishment-oriented feedback. The

sample of participants in this study included 195 NCAA Division III athletes, both male and

female, ranging from ages 18 to 26 who played a variety of intercollegiate sports.

The study consisted of a series of self-report questionnaires, which were constructed to

specifically measure the following variables of interest: preferred coaching behaviors,

14

motivational orientation, and competitive trait anxiety. To measure preferred coaching behaviors,

researchers used the Leadership Scale for Sports which aimed to explore five dimensions of

leader behavior. Parts of this scale consisted of democratic and autocratic decision making styles,

training and instructional behavior, social support, and positive feedback. Motivational

orientation was measured using the Sport Motivation Scale, which had been employed to

operationalize motivation in the sport context in regards to athletes’ perceived reasons for

participation. The scale is comprised of 28 items in which the participants responded on a seven-

point Likert scale. The seven stages of motivation addressed were: intrinsic motivation to know

things, intrinsic motivation to accomplish things, intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation,

identified regulation, introjected regulation, external regulation, and amotiviation. Competitive

trait anxiety was measured by the Sport Anxiety Scale, developed by R.E. Smith in 1990 as a

multidimensional measure. It is comprised of 21 items on a four-point Likert scale that is divided

into three subscales: one form of somatic anxiety (body responses), and two forms of cognitive

anxiety (worry, and concentration and disruption).

The self-report questionnaires were administered before and after a sport session. A

member of the research team provided both oral and written explanations of the research project

and data were collected anonymously. Descriptive statistics were used to strengthen the

relationship between the variables and each data set. According to this model, an athlete’s

preferred coaching behavior will vary as a function of their personal characteristics and factors in

the sport context. Consistent with the study hypothesis, the multivariate results revealed that

athletes’ scores on the sport anxiety subscales were positively linked to: preference for training

and instruction, a democratic leadership style, social support, & positive and informational-based

feedback. The study concludes that there is a stress on the importance of the coach-athlete

15

relationship. It is a formidable task to create an environment that suits each athlete, only if the

coach is open and transparent with their intentions, while understanding the needs of their

players.

Expanding research regarding athletes’ perceptions of coaching behaviors, Kenow and

Williams (1999) studied relationship variables, focusing on coach-athlete compatibility. The

purpose of this study, was to determine if coach-athlete compatibility was significantly related to

athlete perception and evaluation of coaching behaviors; whether compatibility mediates

relationships of anxiety and self-confidence, and whether compatibility, trait anxiety, state

anxiety, and/or self-confidence can significantly predict athlete perception of coaching behavior.

Participants in this study included 68 female collegiate basketball players from non-scholarship

programs, all with at least one full season of playing experience with their coach. Participation

was voluntary, with permission and consent from coaches and athletes.

Instrumentation used in this study was the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire (CBQ), the

Sport Competition Anxiety Test (SCAT) and the Competitive Trait Anxiety Inventory – 2

(CSAI-2). Participants were also asked to rate their compatibility on a scale from 1-9 (nine being

the highest). Each participant completed the questionnaires with coaches absent from the area,

and placed them into envelopes, signing the seal to ensure confidentiality. A correlational

analysis was used to assess the relationship between athlete trait anxiety, state cognitive and

somatic anxiety, state self-confidence, compatibility and total factor scores for the CBQ.

Researchers found that athletes who were high in cognitive anxiety/self-confidence rated

the coach’s behavior negatively. In particular, high trait anxious athletes evaluated the coach’s

communication behaviors as negative. Athletes who were highly compatible with their coach

16

evaluated each coaching behavior factor more favorably than athletes who were less compatible

with their coach. The overall outcomes concluded there were more negative ratings in coaching

behaviors than positive.

Researchers concluded with the notion that if the athletes’ goals, personality, and beliefs

are consistent with those of their coach, the interaction of the individuals will likely be

satisfactory to both parties producing a positive interpersonal atmosphere. Factors in a

relationship as such could lead to a loss of self-confidence for the athlete, which may then impact

the athlete’s perception and recollection of coaching behaviors. Future research may benefit from

a practical standpoint, for coaches to develop good rapport and demonstrate support for their

athletes as this should improve the coach-athlete interaction, regardless of the casual direction of

self-confidence and compatibility. It is suggested that coaches make conscious efforts to improve

interpersonal relationships with their players, as well as to learn how to identify signals of high

cognitive anxiety in their athletes.

A 2013 study conducted by Lee, Mangusen, and Cho, sought to examine the effects of

gender on the influence of athletes’ perceptions of positive and negative strength and

conditioning coach behaviors on strength coach-athlete compatibility. Athletes’ perceptions of

their compatibilities with their coaches are undoubtedly linked to the coaching behaviors they

experience. In the same ways that a team head coach’s behavior has an effect on the

development and experience of an athlete, the strength coach’s impact is just as important to

player confidence and development. This study utilized a sample of 502 NCAA Division I

athletes; after excluding 31 through a screening process, 471 was the final subject pool (N=270

17

males and N=201 females). Varying in age and race, participants were members of softball,

volleyball, and football teams.

Instrumentation used was to measure supportive/emotional composure from the Coaching

Behavior Questionnaire to assess strength coaches’ negative and positive behaviors.

Additionally, an assessment included compatibility ratings, in which player goals, personality,

and beliefs are perceived to be a match of their coaches’. These were self-rated on a scale of one

to nine (one being low and nine being high). A MANOVA was conducted to check for potential

manipulation biases and omission of underlying relationships. Following the statistical nature of

the study, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed to examine the psychometric properties

of the CBQ and Coach-Athlete Questionnaire. Categories of negative action behaviors in student

athletes found in the analysis were: nervousness, discomfort, and worry.

The results of the study showed that the strength coaches’ behaviors of

supportiveness/emotional composure and negative activation were not perceived in a different

structure across gender. Still, while strength coach positive and negative behaviors were

consistent, more variance in compatibility was explained by their supportiveness/emotional

composure in the female sample than in the male sample. This means that the two-factor CBQ

was supported and provided evidence for a moderation effect of gender based on superior

psychometric properties.

In regard to research on coaching behaviors, the same level of attention has not been

observed for strength and conditioning coaches, despite the fact that their leader characteristics

and coaching behaviors can have a significant impact on the development of healthy and

productive strength coach-athlete relationships. Future research suggests that this study should be

sport specialized across athletics to reveal what types of coaching behaviors impact student

18

athletes by sport. Also, in this study the application of the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire to

strength coaches was validated and strength coach-athlete compatibility was further clarified.

A study conducted by Siekanska in 2013, focused on determining whether an athlete

perceived any differences in coaching behaviors depending on whether their coach worked with

a high-expectancy athlete more than they worked with low-expectancy athletes. A secondary

purpose was to acquire an answer to the question of what coaching behaviors athletes perceived

as enhancing or inhibiting to their sport development. Another purpose of the study was to

observe the types of relationships that existed between coaches and athletes. This study included

80 athletes (N=44 males and N=36 females), who represented both individual and team sports.

Seventeen participants were identified as international athletes and were placed into the high

expectancy performance group, and the remaining 67 nationally recognized athletes were placed

into the low performance group.

In a mixed methods examination, participants were asked to complete the Coaches’

Behaviors Survey, then complete an exploratory question survey, such as a guided journaling of

experiences. Section 1 of the questionnaire aimed to examine the degree to which the coach-

athlete interaction affected their achievement and sport development. Section 2 addressed the

participants’ opinions about the coach’s behavior toward the athletes with different sport skills.

This was also used to enumerate behaviors in favor of the athletes’ development and behaviors

that hindered it. The statistical analysis was done using the Statistica 8.0 software. This

calculated basic quantitative data to analyze variables and percentage values in the results.

Qualitatively, the open-ended responses of the survey were categorized by research

professionals. Four themes emerged from this process: 1) results of the quantitative survey, 2)

19

gender differences, 3) dependent variables and sport level, and 4) exploratory responses that had

not been thought of beforehand.

The results of the study revealed that female participants were ready to build a

relationship, and spend time with other members of their team and paid more attention to

coaching behaviors when they were in the lower expectancy group. Researchers also found that

coaching behavior towards more skilled athletes did not result in their enhanced sport growth,

instead it was perceived as a hindrance. It was observed by the lower expectancy group as

favoritism and a lack of instruction towards others from the coach. Additionally, athletes who

were in the low expectancy group recorded excessive criticism, but could not see the same in

their counterparts. Thus, the hypothesis of this study, those who are in the high-expectancy group

receive more recognition and positive reinforcement was supported.

One of the unique findings of this study suggests that high-expectancy athletes’ may

perceive the coaching behaviors, such as favoritism as inhibiting their athletic progress. Thus, to

promote a broad development of the athlete, coaches should adopt an interdisciplinary approach

which takes enhancing and inhibiting aspects of athletic development into consideration.

Coaches should not separate athletes into obvious groups of high and low-expectancy, but rather

create drills and tasks that everyone can participate in, which will enhance the sport development

of all involved. While it is a primary role of coaches to be cognizant of player development,

athletes can contribute to their experience and treatment by their coach by showing a

commitment to their craft, asking for feedback and constructive actions, and by putting in more

time to improve on their own.

20

In a 2005 study, Meyers, Vargas-Tonsing & Feltz examined coaching efficacy in

relationship to the variables of coaching behaviors and team variables. The primary purposes of

this investigation were to examine the influence of proposed sources of efficacy information on

dimensions of coaching efficacy for intercollegiate coaches and to determine the influence of

coaching efficacy on self-reported coaching behavior and team variables in men and women’s

intercollegiate teams. Participants included 135 head coaches, who took part in Time 1 of the

study, and 101 of the same head coaches participated in Time 2. In all a total of 1,618 athletes

also participated. Athletes varied across sports and ranged between the ages of 18-26. All

participants were members of NCAA Division II and III schools in the Midwest.

Data was collected twice for each participating team. First, a questionnaire containing the

Coaching Efficacy Scale was sent to head coaches. Then, a follow up phone call and electronic

email which resulted in a 75% response rate. In the second data collection, both coaches and

athletes were surveyed. Coaches completed questionnaires on the perceived frequency of their

efficacy-enhancing behaviors, while athletes provided their perceptions of the head coach. Head

coaches were asked to appoint someone not directly affiliated with the team to explain the study

as well as to administer the questionnaires. To determine the relationships between the sources

and dimensions of coaching efficacy collected at Time 1, product-moment correlations were

conducted. Thus, the influence of years as a collegiate coach, career-winning percentage, and

perception of team ability on dimensions of coaching efficacy did not differ for males or females.

Also, a multivariate multiple regression analysis was conducted to determine the predictive

strength of each of the proposed sources on dimensions of coaching efficacy.

The findings of this study varied for both the male and female participants. For males,

results supported previous research by demonstrating a relationship between the sources and

21

dimensions of coaching efficacy and the influence of Total Coaching Efficacy on self-reported

coaching behavior and team variables. For female participants, findings extended previous

research by identifying influences of specific dimensions of coaching efficacy for intercollegiate

coaches, a moderating role for coach’s gender on the influence of perceived social support, and a

moderating role for the coach’s gender on the influence of team satisfaction.

Responses from coaches showed that the perception of support from the athletes’ parents

predicted the Character Building Efficacy, Technique Efficacy, and Motivational Efficacy in

leadership which combined is the factor of Total Coaching Efficacy (TCE). Results from

women’s teams showed that the TCE predicted that only coaches reported efficacy-enhancing

behaviors with athletes. However, the relationship between TCE and coaching behaviors was

only significant for female coaches. Also from the results of women’s teams, the TCE did not

predict team satisfaction. Another finding from both men’s and women’s teams was only when

the sex of the male head coach matched the sex of the players did the learning and performance

of the athletes predict coaching behaviors, bringing forth the suggestion that administrators may

want to consider this before making a new hire or implementing a coaching-behavioral

intervention. Additionally, only Motivational Efficacy was positively influenced, because the

possibility of athletes’ gender bias, the moderation of coach’s gender may not fully explain a

relationship between a coach’s belief and team satisfaction, indicating that gender bias is not

solely an indication of team discomfort.

Positive Coaching Behaviors

In a 2009 study by Becker, gaps in the literature on coaching behaviors were described in

the rationale. The first gap noted was that previous research questionnaires were used to evaluate

22

perceptions of coaching behaviors, not athlete feelings. The second gap was that the exclusive

study of coaching behaviors does not allow the weight of other factors, such as coaching

philosophy, athlete experience, and team environment in the evaluations, in order to determine

coaching greatness. Research on coaching behaviors often provides valuable information

regarding leadership styles, feedback patterns and expectancy effects, but it does not provide

insights to the athlete’s experiences of being coached. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to

examine gaps in the literature and explore athlete experiences of great coaching. A total of 18

athletes (N=9 females and N=9 males) who played a variety of sports at the NCAA Division I

level participated in the study.

Phenomenological research methods were implemented to capture athlete experiences of

great coaching. The interview was a primary method of data collection, and fourteen personal

interviews and four phone interviews were conducted, each lasting more than two hours. All

interviews were transcribed verbatim, and then shared with the participant for clarifications and

comments. Then transcriptions were categorized in search of common themes.

Major findings that were discovered by Becker included the following categories: Coach

Attributes, Environment, The System, Relationships, Coaching Actions and Influences.

Participants in the study described background dimensions to their athletic careers to be stable

throughout their experiences, meaning that what they experienced was considered to be normal.

Coaches who were mentioned by participants were consistent with who they were and how they

maintained relationships, managed the team environment, and carried out their system. Thus,

there was no uncertainty, and the athletes knew exactly what to expect from their coaches.

Ultimately the participants were able to evaluate their collegiate coaching experiences as long

23

lasting, extraordinary impressions. The results revealed a more comprehensive picture of factors

that underlie coaching greatness.

Negative Coaching Behaviors

A study of the relationship between anxiety, self-confidence, and evaluation of coaching

behaviors by Kenow and Williams in 1992, tested in a specific setting, Smith and Smoll’s

leadership behaviors in sport. They also examined whether or not athletes’ state anxiety, self-

confidence and perceptions of their coaches’ behavior should be added to the model. The

approach was conducted via two case studies; Study 1 took place four days prior to and four days

after a game, with questions being administered by an assistant coach and took place during the

last month of the competitive season. Study 2 took place 30 minutes prior to competition and

immediately after competition and also at the end of a regular competition season. Participants in

the study included 11 female college basketball players and their male head coach, from an

NCAA Division III team in the southwest. This same sample was also used in the second study.

In both cases, anxiety measures were made with use of the Cognitive State Anxiety Inventory – 2

(CSAI-2), assessing both cognitive and somatic anxiety, as well as the 28-item Coaching

Behavior Questionnaire.

In Study 1, the results of both the CSAI-2 and CBQ were examined to evaluate the

relationships between the factors of anxiety levels and coaching behaviors. During the analysis,

athlete responses to the questions indicated a good deal of discrepancy between the athletes’ and

coach’s perceptions of coaching behaviors. In many of the evaluated areas the coach scored his

behavior positively, while players scored their coach negatively. Considering this discrepancy, it

24

is suggested that future researchers contrast self-perceptions with an observation of actual

coaching behaviors.

In Study 2, it was hypothesized that the coach would not be able to accurately estimate

his players’ anxiety and self-confidence; although athletes were relatively accurate in predicting

their coach’s negative behaviors. All athletes completed the CSAI-2 twice, once to evaluate

themselves and the again to evaluate their coach’s perceptions of their anxiety. The coach

completed a CSAI-2 in relation to their own feelings of anxiety. From this part of the study,

athletes generalized anxiety and self-confidence responses were utilized in the statistics

examining the coach’s ability to measure his athletes’ CSAI-2 scores.

Primary results of study 1 included an observation that athletes who scored high in self-

confidence evaluated coaching behaviors positively while those who scored low evaluated

coaching behaviors negatively.

Results of Study 2 noted significant changes in opinion of emotional outbursts from the

coach. Authors also found, that players evaluated coaching outbursts as unhelpful, while coaches

saw their behavior to be motivational. Athletes’ evaluation of their coach, indicated that they

perceived his/her state to be more anxious and less confident than he/she actually was, which

was contrary to the hypothesis. On the other hand, another hypothesis that proved correct was

those who perceive their coach negatively, had higher levels of cognitive anxiety. Questionnaire

items that correlated with high anxiety were “my coach made me feel uptight” and “my coach’s

behavior during the game made me worry about my performance.” These statements suggest that

the coach’s behavior may contribute to the cognitive anxiety that athletes experience during

games.

25

This study advises future research to employ the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire to

better understand player insights to coaching behaviors. Researchers also suggest that future

research include observation of the coaches’ behaviors in order to determine if the relationships

among anxiety, self-confidence, and athletes’ perception and evaluation of coaching behaviors

are a result of athletes’ perceptions or actual coaching behaviors.

In a 2008 study by Ruggiero and Lattin, examined the nature of interpersonal

communication between female intercollegiate coaches and female athletes, who were of African

descent, through the lens of verbally aggressive communication. Prior to participation in the

study, each participant had previously played four years of high school basketball and had been a

current member of a collegiate women’s basketball team. A total of eight women from NCAA

Divisions I, II, and III institutions were included.

A qualitative descriptive design with a phenomenographic approach was utilized to

examine participants’ perceptions of the influences of verbally aggressive communication from

their coaches. Hegemonic patterns of racial inequality through the use of communication was

observed by open and semi-structured interviews, which made a distinction between first and

second-order perspectives. Data collection was done by one-on-one interviews during a three-

month period in late 2001. The semi-structured interviews began in a location of the participants’

choosing, with a casual conversation before the recorded interview. Each interview lasted

approximately 2-3 hours. Interview tapes were transcribed and then coded and categorized.

During the coding process, six categories were constructed from descriptions of how

participants perceived verbally aggressive communication from their female coaches: threat,

debt, negative esteem, assertive stimulation, activation of impersonal commitments and

26

activation of personal commitments. Many of the participants shared experiences of enduring

threatening verbally aggressive communication in the forms of punishment by loss of

scholarships or early morning and extra practices. Debt was used on participants as a form of

guilt, as if the athletes owed their coach something. The persuasion of negative feelings towards

oneself was found in all eight participants. One reported that self-doubt impacted her personally,

her talent and athletic abilities. Punishment activities typically involved the coach seeking

compliance in a negative manner, excessive running, or difficult drills for long periods of time.

Appealing to persons internalized commitments was true for three of the participants, and

appealing to a person’s commitment to others was found as a negative communication tool as

well.

The descriptive categories that emerged from this study supported the notion that verbally

aggressive communications were frequent and memorable aspects of the communication process

between female collegiate coaches and female athletes of African descent, and included

stereotyping and an increase in uncertainty among individuals. As it is observed that the primary

goal of a head coach, regardless of gender, is to win; the communicative methods chosen may

not be positive or constructive. Future research from this article suggests that positive

communication strategies should be examined by the head coach to prevent verbally aggressive

communication and behaviors.

Poor Coaching

In a qualitative study conducted by Gearity & Murray (2011) sought to examine the

effects of poor coaching by dissecting the lived experiences of athletes. The subjects were

chosen by a process of elimination in which the author solicited a variety of athletes who first

27

answered the question “In your own perception, have you ever been poorly coached.” If he or

she responded affirmingly, then they were asked to participate in the study. Here, the sample of

16 men and women, who were current and former athletes, were evaluated.

In a phenomenological approach participant experiences were shared through a series of

interviews, then transcribed by researchers and trained professionals. This process elicited five

main themes: poor teaching by the coach, uncaring, unfairness, inhibiting athlete’s mental skills

and athlete coping. As themes were further examined, the following sub-categories shaped the

results: distracting, engendering self-doubt, demotivating, dividing the team, focused

concentration and attention, cohesion, and stress and coping. By categorizing statements and

stories of experiences, researchers compared them to each other, and topics in relation to the

Social Cognitive Theory by Bandura (2010), and/or the Achievement Goal Theory (AGT) from

Ames (1992). Researchers employed the AGT more to the results of this study. The AGT is

based on the assumption that an athletes’ motivation is based on the meaning he or she creates

for attaining certain goals: two main orientations that athletes use to measure their competence

are task-goal orientation or ego-goal orientation.

Findings of the study were shown to support previous research, suggesting that a coach

created ego-goal climate is associated with athletes perceiving greater peer conflict, less social

support and positive feedback. They also experienced more punishment-based feedback and

higher anxiety and performance related worry. If this is true, the athlete experience is overall

negative and highly stressful.

Much research has called to diversify approaches to the coach-athlete relationship and

this study highlighted the strength of a phenomenological approach to understanding athlete’s

lived experiences. Future research consists of interventions and adaptations to coping skills such

28

as goal setting, positive self-talk, imagery, and relaxation training in settings where the coach-

athlete relationship is deemed negative – due the relationship between athlete anxiety levels and

poor coaching.

Self-confidence and Mental errors

The literature of Bird and Horn (1990), hypothesized that if mental errors that occur

during competition are representative of cognitive/attentional disruptions, then individuals who

exhibit more mental errors should have higher cognitive anxiety than those who demonstrate

fewer mental errors. In a comparison of settings, both practice and competition areas were

observed to evaluate the increase in anxiety that occurs as a result of the highly evaluative nature

of competition, to prove the relative nature of cognitive anxiety and mental errors. Participants in

this study included an initial subject pool of 202 female high school varsity softball players, aged

14-17. After the first round of questionnaires, the pool was narrowed down to 161 participants.

Those eliminated had received questionnaire scores of 5-6, in order to represent two extremes

sides of the results, scores of one to four and seven to ten were kept. Each participant had

permission from the school and their head coach to be included in the study.

Procedures applied to the study were the Cognitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2)

and the Mental Error Questionnaire (MEQ). Prior to competition participants were given the

CSAI-2 to evaluate different levels of competitive state anxiety; immediately after performance

they were given the MEQ to personally assess the amount of mental errors committed during a

competition. The MEQ results ranged from “much affected” (many mental errors) to “very little

affected” (few mental errors). While the CSAI-2 gave sight to cognitive and somatic anxiety

29

levels, individuals were then assessed by groups of High Mental Mistakes (1-4) and Low Mental

Mistakes (7-10) based on confidence levels.

The authors stated that the results support the prediction that elevations in cognitive

anxiety are directly related to mental errors that occur during sport performance. When

translating the findings into applications and selecting appropriate intervention techniques,

cognitively based strategies should provide the most effective avenues for reducing mental errors

in sport. There is a need to understand the intricacies of the anxiety process and effects of motor

output to better ensure progress in athletes, and to examine ways to lower anxiety in order to

reduce mental errors in athletes.

In a study done by Hays, Thomas, Maynard and Butt (2010), authors examined the

application of confidence profiling in the development of individualized applied psychological

skills intervention. The purpose of the study was to explore the effectiveness of confidence

profiling as the basis for confidence-enhancing interventions. With the guidance of Feltz & Lirgg

from 2001, they aimed to explain the positive relationship between high levels of confidence and

successful sporting performance. The sole participant of this study was one female elite swimmer

who had over eight years of competition experience, both national and international.

The study was conducted in three phases. Phase 1 consisted of gathering background

information and establishing participant needs. In phase 2, a cognitive behavioral intervention

included cognitive restructuring as well as setting personal affirmations. Phase 3 included an

intervention evaluation where confidence types were assessed. Each phase was conducted

consecutively. Murphy’s 8 Step Cognitive Behavior Model of 1992 was used to assess the

results. This model consists of consultation orientation, sport familiarization, evaluation and

30

assessment, goal identification, group intervention, individual intervention, outcome evaluation,

and reassessment of goals. Here, all steps of the model consider the athlete’s functioning in

multiple contexts, and emphasis is placed on viewing the athlete as a person and not a performer.

Results of the study found that the application of Murphy’s 8 Step Model was one of

significance. It can be used to measure confidence from the athlete’s perspective and provide a

basis of one’s own confidence needs. The benefit of confidence profiling for the athlete is that it

can be applied as a means to enhance sport confidence. The authors concluded that the process of

confidence profiling can be used for empowerment and confidence building. In future research,

the case study approach can be used as a means of intervention for coach’s behaviors and for

perceptions of coaching behaviors by allowing the athlete to examine impact of self-feedback.

Relationships of the Variables

In a study by Baker, Côte and Hawes (2000), the purpose was to correlate the relationship

between coaching behaviors and sport anxiety in athletes. The interpersonal relationships

between coaches and athletes was evaluated; a natural expectation of the study was that the

relationship would influence the cognitive appraisal of situations by athletes. The study intended

to explain that specific behaviors of coaches were expected to praise an athlete, making the

athlete feel useful and necessary to the program. This praise would reduce competition anxiety

because the athlete feels more prepared due to the coach’s behavior being appropriate. On the

opposing side, if a coach behaves in ways that an athlete feels are detrimental to his/her

performance, sport anxiety would be expected to rise. Participants in this study were 228

athletes, of which 105, or 46%, were females. Each participant had an average of eleven years of

participation in their sport since youth, and an average of 2.2 years with their current coach.

31

Multiple regression analyses were used to examine the relationships of seven coaching

behaviors (physical training and planning, mental preparation, goal setting, competition

strategies, technical skills, personal rapport, and negative personal rapport) and three forms of

sport anxiety (age, gender, and sport type). Results of the regression analyses clearly indicated

that certain coach behaviors are better predictors of sport anxiety than others. Previous research

had demonstrated that perceived coaching behaviors were not significant predictors of athlete

anxiety. The findings in this article can be attributed to the use of different scales in research

analyses.

The strongest relationship found in this study was between negative personal rapport

behaviors and anxiety levels in athletes. This is demonstrated when total anxiety, somatic

anxiety, concentration disruption, and worry were significant outcomes of negative personal

rapport. The results indicate that negative behaviors have an impact on performance and errors in

competition and had a significant bearing on the coach-athlete relationship in which both coach

and athlete need to have an understanding of athlete anxiety.

While there was no uncertainty and the athletes knew exactly what to expect from their

coaches, negative behaviors from the coach were shown to preempt high anxiety in players. The

practical applications of these results suggest that coaches should understand the impact that

their behaviors have on anxiety levels in athletes. Future research based on this study suggests

that these relationships (between coaching behaviors and anxiety levels) should be tested

specifically with one sport group and their coach.

32

In an extension of research on the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire, Williams et al.

(2003) sought to reexamine the factor structure of the questionnaire by administering it to a large

enough pool of diverse participants to conduct both an Explanatory Factor Analysis (EFA) and a

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). While there is little research on the topic, researchers

continued to refer to the classic works of Smoll, and previous Kenow research. These previous

works are more of an ignition to intervention types of research. The participants of this study

were 484 athletes (N=273 college and N=211 high school), with a mean age of 17, who played

basketball, softball, baseball, and volleyball. Participants had almost one full season or more of

playing experience under their current head coach.

Testing took place prior to a practice session in the last third of the season, and in most

cases there were no games within the testing dates. Quantitative instruments employed for data

collection were the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire (CBQ) which consisted of a 21-question

series set on a 4-point Likert scale, responses ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree,

with no neutral option. The CSAI-2 was administered to evaluate self-confidence. Also, a

Compatibility Questionnaire was included to see if the relationship between a coach and a player

showed a difference in the CBQ. The EFA was conducted via Statistical Package for Social

Sciences, which was followed by a CFA. Correlational analyses were used to assess the

relationship between the athletes’ evaluation of coaching behaviors on the two CBQ factors, and

the athletes self-reported competitive trait anxiety, cognitive and somatic anxiety, state self-

confidence, and coach athlete compatibility.

Findings across all sports demonstrated that athletes who reported higher trait anxiety and

lower self-confidence prior to competition were more likely to perceive their coaches’ behaviors

during competition as ones with a negative impact, as opposed to athletes who reported lower

33

amounts of trait anxiety and high self-confidence. If higher trait-anxious and cognitive and

somatic-anxious athletes interpreted coaching behaviors as threatening, then it is not surprising

that these athletes would evaluate the coaching behaviors as having caused them more worry,

distracted attention, elevated physiological arousal, and poorer performance compared to athletes

whose self-report indicated lower levels of anxiety. The preceding rationale also could explain

the similar negative evaluation of coaching behaviors by athletes who lacked or had lower self-

confidence.

Future research suggests that in addition to the need for a more thorough examination of

coach-athlete compatibility, researchers should consider examining other athlete and coach

individual difference variables that might influence coaching behaviors and athletes perceptions

and evaluative reactions to these behaviors. A related approach might be to enhance coach-

athlete interactions by testing the effectiveness of interventions designed to decrease athletes’

anxiety levels and to increase their self-confidence. The premise would be that such

modifications would lead to an improvement in athletes’ perceptions and evaluative reactions to

their coach’s behavior.

34

Chapter 4

Discussion and Conclusion

For this synthesis, a total of thirteen research articles were reviewed in order to gain a

better understanding of the impact of coaching behaviors in relation to mental errors and athlete

self-confidence, specifically for female collegiate athletes. The overall purpose of this synthesis

project was to seek answers to the following research questions:

1) What is the impact of coaching behavior on the performance of female collegiate

athletes?

2) Which coaching behaviors are perceived to be positive by female collegiate athletes?

3) Which coaching behaviors are perceived to be negative by female collegiate athletes?

4) What impact does coaching behavior have on the self-confidence of female collegiate

athletes?

5) What impact does self-confidence have on athletes’ mental errors?

6) What is the relationship between mental errors and performance?

The findings will be discussed in respect to the aforementioned questions.

What is the impact of coaching behavior on the performance of female collegiate athletes?

Based on the literature reviewed, it is clear that the effects of coaching behaviors on

female athletes needs additional observation, research, and intervention in all levels of sport,

perhaps especially at the collegiate level. As collegiate sports have changed since the

implementation of Title IX, both female and male collegiate athletes deal with a great deal of

35

pressure in their lifestyle. Athletes are expected to complete courses and receive high marks,

practice for more than 18 hours per week, compete in 2-3 games per week during the regular

season, travel, make contributions to their team cohesion, and take care of themselves. Needless

to say, collegiate athletes, especially those on athletic scholarships, are under a great deal of

pressure. Female athletes, who at surface level have been given the same experiences and

responsibilities as their male counter parts, perceive and interpret those experiences differently.

According to Becker (2009), coaches are responsible for developing athletes’ mental,

physical, technical, and tactical abilities. In the collegiate setting, it is expected that the coach

wants to win and teach the game, but they also want to foster a growth environment where their

athletes enter their program as girls but leave as young women upon graduation. The research of

Meyers et al. (2005), provides evidence that female collegiate athletes’ relationships and coach

predictors of efficacy-enhancing behaviors were found to be in agreement with Horn’s 2002

finding, that the gender of the coach and the gender of the team may exert indirect influences on

coaching behaviors. In sum, this supports the idea that women should be coaching women,

because the athletes perception of coaching behaviors, is genuine and relatable.

Coaching behaviors are the overall difference in an athletes’ experience on any given

team. Sometimes the wins matter, but a common denominator in many teams’ winning or losing

is the way the coach treats the players, which is what determines if the experience is worth

having and worth remembering. If an athlete listens to their coaches’ opinions, respects their

system, and feels of value to the team, they typically express feelings of contentment and

comfort with their coach. However, the observation is two-fold; if a coach expresses criticism in

a constructive manner, respects players’ differences in background, personality and ability, and

36

values each players’ contributions to the team, then they are likely to have players who show

contentment and satisfaction.

Becker’s (2009) research found that athletes who were content described background

dimensions of their coaches to be stable throughout their experience. These coaches were

consistent in who they were, how they maintained relationships, managed the team environment

and carried out their system. As a result, there was no psychological uncertainty; athletes knew

what to do and what to expect from their coaches. The notion that athletes are happy knowing

what to expect from their coach shows value in consistency. Players will often express

discomfort because their coach was known to ‘fly off the handle’ or ‘lose it.’

Horn et al. (2011) indicates that there are types of behaviors and/or leadership styles

exhibited by coaches that can either facilitate or undermine the psychosocial growth and

development of athletes. Lee et al. (2013) found evidence that positive coaching behaviors, such

as praise and encouragement, resulted in greater levels of athlete enjoyment in training and being

coached as opposed to negative coaching behaviors, such as yelling and frequent criticism. Thus,

coaches need to understand the impact of words, phrases, disparate treatment, etc. Horn et al.

(2011) also found that athletes who are high in competitive trait anxiety may prefer coaches who

are socially supportive, responding to athlete performance with positive and encouraging

responses, rather than critical or punishment-oriented feedback.

As many studies have examined athletes’ preferred coaching behaviors, researchers lack

the application of their findings to a team that may be dealing with inhibiting coaching behaviors

and stressful environments. This means that there are not enough studies that examine current

athletes’ experiences in relation to their coaching environments and performance. When

examining the impact of coaching behaviors; it can be said that where there is a need for

37

observation, there is a need for correction and improvement, and as we delve deeper into

coaching impacts, positive and negative. This is a need for further research and possible

education the coaching environment and process.

Which coaching behaviors are perceived to be positive by female collegiate athletes?

While much of the research on coaching behaviors is directed towards examining

negative or inhibiting behaviors, many authors have provided suggestions on interventions of

coaching behaviors and the examination and application of positive behaviors. Becker (2009)

concluded that coaches who exhibited positive behaviors were those that had the ability to

evaluate player personnel and applied an observable amount of experience, meaning that players

understood what their coach was doing and could rationalize why they were doing things in a

certain way.

Horn et al. (2011) indicates that positive behaviors from coaches are a result of their

leadership style. A democratic leadership style that allows players to have opportunities to

contribute to team decisions was appreciated by collegiate athletes. According to their findings,

female athletes respond better to coaches who provide them with opportunities to learn and

achieve based on clear communication and feedback. In environments where athletes perceive

coaching behaviors as non-motivating and inhibiting, it is apparent that the coach has become a

dictator or too controlling in practice and competition.

Additionally, Siekanska, Blecharz, and Wojtowicz (2013), concluded that in order to

promote the broad development of an athlete, coaches should conduct themselves so that each

player on the team feels as if they are an important and contributing member. During practices,

38

coaches who include and teach each player drills and skills are exhibiting behaviors that players

read as caring and non-preferential to any player who may be better or worse than another.

Coaches who show athletes their value to the team create an experience that athletes tend to

evaluate as a positive one.

Which coaching behaviors are perceived to be negative by female collegiate athletes?

In Ruggerio and Lattin’s study of the impact of coaching behaviors on female collegiate

athletes, specifically participants of African descent (2008), verbally aggressive forms of

communication were found to be the most prominent inhibitor in athlete performances. Some

scholars suggest that verbal aggression is simply one way of persuading someone to respond in a

specific manner. Although, different compliance-gaining strategies may be used to obtain the

ultimate goal of gratifying the person who is sending the message (i.e. the coach), in this study

researchers have taken into account the impact of negative and verbally aggressive

communication and suggest that the effects produce negative motivational results.

Examples of verbal aggression found in Ruggerio and Lattin’s 2008 study include threats

such as “You are replaceable” and “I’m going to break you” (p.113). Debt was also inflicted on

players – coaches would imply that an athlete owed them something for giving them an athletic

scholarship. In turn, the female athletes in the study expressed negative feelings about

themselves, doubting their talent and athletic abilities. In some cases, negative self-feelings were

interpreted as personal attacks by the coaches due to statements such as “You aren’t worth sh-t,”

“You’re a waste of talent,” and “You must need brain surgery, because you are so stupid” (p.

115).

39

Participants from this study also identified punishment as an inhibiting factor in their

collegiate experience. In many cases, coaches utilize punishing activities in an effort to seek

compliance from their players. Physical exercises such as laps, suicides, and elongated drills

were said to have a negative effect on producing motivation. Of the young women who

participated, four said they ran for every little mistake and two said they resented being punished

for their other teammates’ mistakes. The other two participants said that their coaches placed

unrealistic expectations on them, and it essentially weighed them down.

Gearity and Murray’s research in 2011 on athlete perceptions of the psychological effects

of poor coaching, concluded that a coach who creates ego-goal climate is associated with athletes

perceiving greater peer conflict, less social support and positive feedback, and higher anxiety and

performance-related worry. A. Bandura (2010), defines an ego-goal orientation as one’s need

and primary thought to break records and show others up, while the task-goal orientation is based

on one’s need for self-reference and reflection in order to master a task. Gearity and Murray

(2011), identified common instances in which the coach contributed to decreases in athletes’

self-perceptions of ability and worth when they enforced their ego-goal orientation onto their

task-goal oriented players.

Self-efficacy can be described as the belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute

the course of action required to produce given attainments (Myers, Vargas-Tonsing, and Feltz,

2005). Coaches should be concerned with the outcomes that occur as a result of low and negative

self-efficacy in their players and try not to contribute to those feelings. Contributions by the

coach’s behavior to negative self-perceptions can have an impact, whether they are physical,

verbal, or non-verbal. In an easily observable behavior to outsiders, coaches may throw a clip

40

board or flip a chair during a competition, they may also say hurtful things such as “Get out, I

want someone else” or “You’re so horrible.”

A non-verbal behavior often exhibited by coaches is changing a players’ position without

telling them, or not playing an athlete in competitions without telling them why they are not

playing. Such behaviors are not only negative but they also contribute to lower levels of self-

perception and internal interpretations of the coaches’ perception of player abilities. According

to Kenow & Williams (1992), coaches should be made aware of potentially damaging

consequences of their behaviors and be given guidelines in modifying non-verbal messages in

order to be more supportive and encouraging towards athletes, especially those with high levels

of anxiety.

What impact does coaching behavior have on the self-confidence of female collegiate

athletes?

Coaching behaviors are said to have a lasting impact on athletes’ self-confidence, thus

creating reasons to examine the impact of those behaviors on a deeper level than performance.

Performance is an outside evaluation of an athlete, but the inner evaluation is the measurement of

self-confidence. According to Williams et al. (2003), athletes who report higher levels of trait

anxiety and lower levels of self-confidence are more likely to perceive their coaches’ behaviors

as negative. Typically, these negative behaviors are exhibited during competition. Athletes who

report low levels of trait anxiety and high levels of self-confidence are more likely to be

unbothered by their coach’s behaviors; they either pay little attention to them or find them to be

motivating. Additionally, if collegiate athletes with lower amounts of self-confidence interpret

41

coaching behaviors as threatening, these athletes would evaluate their coaches’ behavior as

causing them more worry and distraction during competition.

The use of fear and intimidation was found to decrease levels of self-confidence in Baker,

Cotê, and Hawes (2000), study of the “Relationship Between Coaching Behaviors and Sport

Anxiety in Athletes.” This finding is significant and was repeated in multiple studies as

researchers have identified a link between the behaviors that coaches exhibit, the internalization

of verbal and non-verbal actions which diminish self-confidence, and the output post interaction

– which is the athletes’ performance.

A primary responsibility of coaches is to develop their athletes mentally, physically, and

athletically, but a disregard for the mental development of a player only leads to negative

experiences that hinder performance. The process of making the coach-athlete interaction well

balanced is unique based on the individuals involved. Many professional female athletes attribute

their success to experience and growth during their college years. According to Becker (2009),

female athletes valued their coaches more when they gave them the opportunity to talk one-on-

one and when coaches shared the purpose for things that they were doing on and off of the

court/fields. Another example of a self-confidence boosting environment found by Becker

(2009), was the ability for players to create a personal relationship with their coach. Thus, the

impact of the professional relationship between the coach and the athlete was less damaging to

self-confidence because the athlete knew that behaviors and suggestions were coming from a

place of genuine care for the individual player’s development.

42

What impact does self-confidence have on athletes’ mental errors?

The relationship between self-confidence and mental errors is one that has been seldom

examined, but research from Bird and Horn (1990), Williams et al. (2003), and Hays et al.

(2010), provides insight to how levels of self-confidence can determine how an athlete performs

in competition. Although there is a connection between errors and performance, this connection

will be discussed in the next section. Here, we will examine the ways in which self-confidence

and mental errors are linked; both measures are internal factors in athletes, therefore the

influence is psychological.

As concluded by Bird and Horn (1990), Kenow and Williams (1992), Kenow and

Williams (1999), Baker, Cotȇ and Hawes (2000), and Williams et al. (2003), athletes who had

higher levels of self-confidence also had lower levels of cognitive and state anxiety, resulting in

better performances and fewer errors during competition. The role of confidence profiling

examined by Hays, et al. (2010), provided a basis for confidence-enhancing strategies for better

athlete performance. Confidence profiling is the assessment of an athletes’ self-confidence in

relation to their sport setting. The sole female participant in this study highlighted that she

struggled to have confidence in herself, putting herself down before others could. She also rated

her confidence level as a three on a scale of 1-10. As a result of her low confidence she struggled

in competition. If an error was made, her tendency was to remain down instead of bouncing

back.

Due to the internal nature of mental errors, the impact they have on self-confidence can

only be self-measured and then communicated by the athlete. This implies that the relationship

can only be speculated by outsiders such as coaches, teammates, and parents. It is important to

understand that the relationship between mental errors and self-confidence is indeed directly

43

linked because when self-confidence is high, mental errors are low. This conclusion comes from

a gathering of information on the amounts of anxiety a player feels during competition; although

anxiety can be induced by outside factors, the internal interpretation of those factors is what

impacts self-confidence. Therefore, when self-confidence is low, mental errors in competition

become high.

What is the relationship between mental errors and performance?

As indicated above, performance is observed by others, and many times is expressed

statistically, mental errors can best be evaluated by a player themselves. Mental errors can be

referred to as mistakes; they are instances where the player knows what to do but makes an error

in execution, much like a turnover in the game of basketball. It is often observed that after an

error is committed a player may have difficulty bouncing back and cannot remain invested in the

game. Often times they become more focused on the mistake, or not making the mistake again.

The outside observation of performance is often inconsistent with player self-evaluations.

For example, in the game of basketball, a player continuously turns the ball over but has 23

points and 10 rebounds in that same game. This player may not be focused on having helped lead

their team to a victory, but more on how to commit fewer turnovers. Thus, the assumption that a

very good player makes a small number of mistakes maybe untrue. We only know truth to an

athletes’ mental errors when we ask them to reflect on them and then compare thoughts to

performance. Research by Hays et al. (2010), and Gearity and Murray (2011), have taken

qualitative approaches to the study of mental errors and have found reflection or journaling to be

the most revealing data collection method by far.

44

Chapter 5

Future Research

The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between coaching behaviors,

self-confidence, and mental errors in relation to performance. Investigating the perceptions of

athletes regarding positive and negative coaching behaviors by identifying how coaches build

self-confidence in athletes and how self-confidence is related to mental errors in performance

may help athletes understand their own needs and may help coaches behave in a manner that is

conducive to increasing athlete self-confidence.

Information presented in this synthesis indicates that the “Triangle of Effects” is not only

in need of validation, but may be utilized to enhance athlete performance and self-confidence via

coaching behaviors. The valid interdependence of the Triangle would suggest that the findings of

future research be applied to interrupt negative environments and make corrective suggestions to

coaches. A study that does this may be able to link the elevation of self-confidence in athletes

with the decrease in mental errors during performance.

Triangle of Effects:

Coaching Behaviors

Mental Errors/PerformanceSelf Confidence

45

In terms of translating the findings into applications when selecting appropriate

intervention techniques, cognitively based strategies may provide the most effective avenues for

reducing mental errors in sport (Bird & Horn, 1990). Intervention can also be implemented by

individual coaches; although, without identifying the problem there would be no cause for

intervention. Gearity and Murray (2011) suggest forms of coping for athletes with high stress

environments that can be introduced, with little to no cost, by the coach, such as goal setting,

positive self-talk, imagery, and relaxation training.

It is assumed that all coaches enjoy working with the highly confident, self-motivated

athlete. However, if an athlete does not exhibit high levels of self-confidence, then their output

may subconsciously contribute to the coaches’ behaviors that make the coach-athlete interaction

less compatible (Kenow & Williams 1999). Future researchers may wish to address this issue by

exposing the expressions of behavior of both the coaches and athletes in order to gain a better

perspective of what people feel in response to others’ behaviors. The internalization of behaviors

has been said to be what enhances or inhibits self-confidence. Players who feel less confident as

a result of their coaches’ behaviors tend to be less compatible with the coach and have less

impressive performances.

Kenow and Williams (1992) suggested that supporting behaviors of coaches are clear

communication to athletes regarding their roles and tasks. Research from Baker, Cotê and Hawes

(2000) add that by fostering a sense of preparedness in athletes, coaches can decrease forms of

anxiety by simply taking the time to change their behaviors. Becker (2009) notes that the balance

between the personal and professional relationship for the coach and athlete has a significant

bearing on an athlete’s performance as well; an important piece of the balance is some kind of

personal aspect to the relationship, and not business all of the time. The implementation of a

46

well-balanced coach athlete relationship will help create a perception of the relationship for the

athlete, thus enhancing self-confidence and ultimately reducing mental errors.

Although, there are many ways to evaluate self-confidence, mental errors, and coaching

behaviors, the examination of their interdependent relationship may be the route to building

successful teams – both on and off the court/fields. Future research should examine the variables

in a variety of specific sport settings. Application of the findings for each player and the coach

may be beneficial for the team environment, and may enhance athlete self-confidence and reduce

mental errors, which in turn will lead to better performance and results.

47

References

Critical Mass

*Baker, J., Jean, C., & Hawes, R. (2000). The relationship between coaching behaviors and sport

anxiety in athletes. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport Vol. 3 (No. 2). Pages 110-119

*Becker, A.J. (2009). It’s not what they do, it’s how they do it: Athlete experiences of great coaching.

International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Vol. 4 (No. 1). Pages 93-119.

Bird. A.M., Horn. M.A., (1990). Cognitive Anxiety and Mental Errors in Sport. Journal of Sport &

Exercise Psychology, Vol. 12, pgs. 217-222.

*Gearity, B.T., Murray, M.A., (2011). Athletes’ experiences of the psychological effects of poor

coaching. Journal of Psychology of Sport & Exercise Vol. 12. Pages 213-211.

*Hays, K., Thomas, O., Maynard, I., & Butt, J. (2010). The role of confidence profiling in cognitive-

behavioral interventions in sport. The Sport Psychologist Vol. 18. Pages 393-414.

*Horn, S.T., Bloom, P., Berglund, K.M., & Packard, S. (2011). Relationship between collegiate

athletes’ psychological characteristics and their preferences for different types of coaching

behavior. The Sport Psychologist Vol. 25. Pages 190-211.

Kenow, L.J., & Williams. J.M., (1992). Relationship between anxiety, self-confidence, and evaluation

of coaching behaviors. The Sport Psychologist, Vol. 6. pages 344-357.

Kenow, L., Williams, J.M. (1999). Coach-athlete compatibility and athletes’ perception of coaching

behaviors. Journal of Sport Behavior, Vol. 22 (No. 2), pages 251-259.

*Lee, H., Magunsen, M.J., & Cho, S. (2013). Strength coach-athlete compatibility: Roles of coaching

behaviors and athlete gender. International Journal of Applied Sport Sciences Vol. 25 (No. 1).

Pages 55-67.

*Myers, N.D., Vargas-Tonsing, T.M., Feltz, D.L. (2005). Coaching efficacy in intercollegiate coaches:

sources of, coaching behavior, and team variables. Journal of Psychology of Sport & Exercise

Vol. 6. Pages 129-143.

*Ruggiero, T.E. & Lattin, K.S. (2008). Intercollegiate female coaches’ use of verbally aggressive

communication toward African American female athletes. Howard Journal of Communications

Vol. 19 (No. 2). Pages 105-124.

48

*Siekanska, M., Blecharz, J. & Wojtowicz, A. (2013). The athletes’ perception of coaches’ behaviors

towards competitors with a different level. Journal of Behavioural Sciences in Sport Vol. 39.

Pages 231-242.

*Williams, J.M., Jerome, G.J., Kenow, L.J., Rogers, T., Sartain, T.A., & Darland, G. (2003). Factor

structure of the coaching behavior questionnaire and its relationship to athlete variables. The

Sport Psychologist, Vol. 17, pages 16-34.

49

Appendix A: Synthesis Article Grid *In alphabetical order

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/Future Research

Baker, J., Côte, J., & Hawes, R., (2000). The relationship between coaching behaviors and sport anxiety in athletes. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport Vol. 3 (No. 2). Pages 110-119.

The purpose of this article is to correlate the relationship between coaching behaviors and sport anxiety in athletes. Using a variety of performance and perception of coaching behavior analyses, the interpersonal relationship between coach and athlete was evaluated due to the expectant nature that the relationship is predicted to influence the cognitive appraisal of situations by athletes.

Instrumentation used in this article were the Coach Behavior Scale for Sport, a 44-item scale which examines frequency of 7 coaching behaviors. Physical Training and Planning, Goal Setting, Mental Preparation, Technical Skills, Personal Rapport, Negative Personal Rapport, Competition Strategies, Sport Anxiety. Sport Anxiety Scale, a 22 item multi-dimensional scale, which measures trait anxiety in sport situations. Using three sub-scales. 1 measuring somatic anxiety, and 2 measuring forms of cognitive anxiety.

Participants of the study included, 228 athletes, 46% female and 52% male. All who participated on average 11 plus years in their respective sports, and had on average 2.2 years with their current coach.

Multiple regression analyses were used to examine the relationships of the seven coaching behaviors and three forms of sport anxiety. Age, gender and sport type were statistically controlled in the first step to remove their influence on the examined relationships.

Results of the regression analyses clearly indicated that certain coach behaviors are better predictors of sport anxiety than others, which contrasted with previous research. But can be attributed to the use of different scales in research analyses. The strongest relationship found in this study was between negative personal rapport behaviors and anxiety levels in athletes.

Athletes who report high negative personal rapport behaviors (feel intimidated, and fearful of their coach) also report higher mounts of sport anxiety. The weighing of data suggests that negative personal rapport behaviors and competition strategies behaviors are more influential in the relationships among forms of cognitive anxiety than for somatic anxiety. While the total anxiety measures are significant for both of the behaviors. The practical applications of these results suggest that coaches should consider the impact that their behaviors have on anxiety levels in their athletes. Future research should test these measures on specific sports groups. By fostering a sense of preparedness in athletes by increasing the frequency of these behaviors prior to and during competition, coaches can expect to decrease these forms of anxiety in their athletes.

50

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

Becker, A.J. (2009). It’s not what they do, It’s how they do it: Athlete experiences of great coaching. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Vol. 4 (No. 1). Pages 93-119.

The purpose of this study was to complete a gap in the literature on coaching behaviors. The first gap being that questionnaires were used to evaluate the perceptions of coaching behaviors not feelings, the second being the exclusive study on coaching behaviors doesn’t not allow the weight of other factors in the evaluations. Specifically, research on coaching behaviors provides valuable information regarding leadership styles, feedback patterns & expectancy effects.

Phenomenological research methods were implemented to capture athlete experiences of great coaching. The interview method was taken with great emphasis to complete the study. The overarching topic being an athletes experience in their collegiate sports.

A sample of 18 participants included 9 females and 9 males who represented various sports. Race identification varied with 61% Caucasian participants, 11% Asian, 11% African American and 5% Pacific Islander.

Data were collected by 14 personal interviews & four phone interviews due to logistical reasons. Demographic information was collected post interview. All interviews were transcribed verbatim, which were then, shared with the respective participant for clarifications and comments. Then transcriptions were categorized in search of common themes.

Six major findings included: Coach Attributes, Environment, The System, Relationships, Coaching Actions and Influences. Participants described the background dimensions to be stable throughout their experiences. These coaches were consistent with who they were and how they maintained relationships, managed the team environment, and carried out their system. Thus, there was no uncertainty and the athletes

The results revealed a more comprehensive picture of factors that underlie in coaching greatness. Ultimately the participants were able to evaluate their collegiate coaching experiences as long lasting, extraordinary impressions.

51

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

knew exactly what to expect from their coaches.

Bird. A.M., Horn. M.A., (1990). Cognitive Anxiety and Mental Errors in Sport. Journal of Sport & Exercise Phycology, Vol. 12, pgs. 217-222.

The purpose of this study was to show that if metal errors that occur during competition are representative of cognitive/attentional disruptions, then, individuals who exhibit more mental errors should have higher cognitive anxiety than those who demonstrate fewer mental errors. Utilizing the explanation that the increase in anxiety that occurs as a result of the highly evaluative nature of the competitive setting as compared to practice conditions to prove the relative nature cognitive anxiety

Prior to competition participants were given the CSAI-2 and immediately after performance they were given the MEQ. The MEQ was based on a 10-point bipolar scale ranging from much affected (many mental errors) to very little affected (few mental errors). Individuals were then assessed by groups of High Mental Mistakes (1-4) and Low Mental Mistakes (7-10) based on confidence levels.

The initial subject pool was 202 female high school varsity softball players, ages 14-17. After the first round of questionnaires the pool was narrowed down to 161 participants by elimination of questionnaire results where those receiving a score of 5-6 were eliminated to represent two extremes sides of the results. Each had permission

A MANOVA was used to determine if there were overall differences between the low and the high mental groups.

Consistent with other available evidence, the predictive ability of the scales may vary as a function of certain situational factors, skill level, and nature of sport. The authors stated that the results support the prediction that elevations in cognitive anxiety are directly related to mental errors that occur during sport performance.

The framework that guides this study: cognitive (worry), and somatic (heightened physiological activation) types of anxiety, has shown its need for understanding. There is a need to understand the intricacies of the anxiety process and effects of motor output. When translating the findings into applications and selecting appropriate intervention techniques, cognitively based strategies should provide the most effective avenues for reducing mental errors in sport.

52

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

and mental errors.

from the school and head coaches to participate.

Gearity, B.T., Murray, M.A., (2011). Athletes’ experiences of the psychological effects of poor coaching. Journal of Psychology of Sport & Exercise Vol. 12. Pages 213-211.

The purpose of this study was to describe the psychological effects of poor coaching reported by collegiate, professional and semi-professional athletes by employing a qualitative research design, this study sought to describe lived experiences to build the framework.

The subjects were chosen by a process of elimination in which the author solicited a variety of athletes who answered questions to deem them fit for the study. If an athletes’ responses showed signs of poor coaching they were invited to be a part of the study. In a phenomenological approach participant experiences were shared through a series of interviewing and transcribing, which developed five main themes: Poor teaching by the coach, Uncaring, Unfair, Inhibiting athlete’s mental

Participants of the study included 16 former and current athletes who self-reported having been poorly coached.

As themes were analyzed, they were broken into the following emerging sub themes: distracting, engendering self-doubt, demotivating, dividing the team, focus concentration and attention, cohesion and stress and coping. By process of categorizing statements and stories of experiences, researchers compared them to each other as well

Findings of the study were assessed in relation to two widely known theories: Social Cognitive Theory and Achievement Goal Theory. They were found to support previous research suggesting that a coach created ego-goal climate is associated with athletes perceiving greater peer conflict, less social support and positive feedback, more punishment-based feedback,

Consistent with the call to diversify approaches to the coach-athlete relationship, the study highlighted the strength of a phenomenological approach to understanding athletes lived experiences. The study concluded that future research consists of interventions and adaptations to coping skills such as goal setting, positive self-talk, imagery, and relaxation training, in settings where the coach-athlete relationship is deemed a negative one.

53

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

skills and Athlete coping.

as to place topics in relation to SCT or AGT.

and higher anxiety and performance related worry.

Hays, K., Thomas, O., Maynard, I., & Butt, J. (2010). The role of confidence profiling in cognitive-behavioral interventions in sport. The Sport Psychologist Vol. 18. Pages 393-414.

Authors of this study took a case study approach to examine the application of confidence profiling to the development of individualized applied psychological skills intervention. The purpose was to explore the effectiveness of confidence profiling as the basis for confidence-enhancing interventions.

The study was conducted in three phases. Phase 1 included consisted of gathering background information and establishing participant needs. In phase 2, a cognitive behavioral intervention included cognitive restructuring as well as setting personal affirmations. Phase 3 included an intervention evaluation where confidence types were assessed. Each using Murphy’s 8 Step Cognitive Behavior Model.

The participants included one female athlete who had over eight years’ competition experience.

Due to the case study approach to this examination, each phase could not be worked on simultaneously rather consecutively. Phase 1 included initial contact with coach and player, confidence profiling for each, and summary. Phase 2 included identification of development areas, cognitive

The study found that use of Murphy’s eight step model, was one of significance and the benefit of confidence profiling for the athlete, which can be applied as a means to enhance sport confidence. More importantly, it can be used to measure confidence from the athlete’s perspective & provide a basis of one’s own confidence needs.

Findings suggest that the process of confidence profiling can be used for empowerment and confidence building. In future research the model can be used as a means of intervention for coach’s behaviors and for perceptions of coaching behaviors, by allowing the athlete to examine self-impact of feedback.

54

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

restructuring, personal affirmations and self-esteem and goal setting. Phase 3 included re-administration of the confidence profile, a post-experimental interview and post intervention debrief with the coach.

Horn, S.T., Bloom, P., Berglund, K.M., & Packard, S. (2011). Relationship between collegiate athletes’ psychological characteristics and their preferences for

The purpose of this study was to determine if athletes’ psychological characteristics are correlated with their preferences for different types of coaching behaviors and leadership styles.

The study consisted of a series of self-report questionnaires which were constructed to specifically measure the following variables of interest: Preferred coaching behaviors, Motivational orientation, and Competitive trait

The participants consisted of 195 intercollegiate athletes, which was filtered down from an original count of 207 NCAA Division III athletes. Of the sample 109

The self-report questionnaires were administered before or after a sport session, where a member of the research team provided both oral and written explanation of

According to this model an athlete preferred coaching behavior will vary as a function of both their own personal characteristics and factors in the sport context.

There is a relatively large body of research to show that the behaviors exhibited by coaches in practice and competitive contexts do have a significant impact on their athletes’ levels of anxiety and motivational orientation. Mainly, this study concludes with the stress on the importance of the coach/athlete relationship, where it is only formidable to create the environment that suits each

55

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

different types of coaching behavior. The Sport Psychologist Vol. 25. Pages 190-211.

anxiety. Which then brought forth additional sub-scales.

were males and 86 females, with an age range of 18-26 years old. These athletes participated in a variety of sports.

the research project. Data were collected nameless and anonymously. Descriptive statistics were computed and screened, a univariate analysis was used to strengthen the relationship between the variables and each data set.

Consistent with the study hypothesis, the multivariate results revealed that athletes scores on the sport anxiety subscales were positively linked to preference for training and instruction, a democratic leadership, style, social support, & positive and informational-based feedback.

athlete if the coach is open and transparent with their intentions while understanding the needs of their players.

Kenow, L.J., & Williams. J.M., (1992). Relationship between anxiety, self-confidence, and evaluation of coaching behaviors. The Sport Psychologist, Vol. 6. pages

The purpose of this study was to test in a specific setting Smith and Smoll’s leadership behaviors in sport, additionally to examine whether or not athletes’ state anxiety, self-confidence and perceptions of their

The approach was conducted via two case studies. Study 1 took place 4 days prior to and 4 days after a game, with questions being administered by an assistant coach and similar in nature. Ex: my coach is usually calm before a game

Participants of the study included 11 female college basketball players and their male head coach, from an NCAA Division III team in the southwest, this

In cases, anxiety measures were made with use of the CSAI-2, assessing both cognitive and somatic anxiety. As well as the 28-item Coaching Behavior

Primary results of study 1 included an observation that athletes who scored high in self-confidence evaluated coaching behaviors positively while those who

Authors found common in case two, that players evaluating coaching outbursts as unhelpful while coach saw their behavior to be motivational. As athletes evaluated their coach, they perceived his state to be more anxious and less confident than he actually was. Which showed to be contrary to the hypothesis. On the other hand, another hypothesis proved correct where

56

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

344-357.

coaches’ behavior should be added to the model.

or I am usually calm before a game. Questions were in the form of a questionnaire – Coaches Behavioral Questionnaire. Study two took place 30 minutes prior to competition and immediately after competition.

same sample was also used in the second study. Study one consisted of evaluation during the last month of the competitive season. Study two focused on competition between the top teams in the conference during championships.

Questionnaire. scored low did not. While the coach rated his behavior normal. Results of study 2 noted significant changes in opinion of emotional outbursts from the coach.

those who perceive their coach negatively, have lower levels of cognitive anxiety.

Kenow, L., Williams, J.M. (1999). Coach-athlete compatibility and athletes’ perception of coaching behaviors. Journal of Sport Behavior, Vol. 22 (No. 2), pages 251-259.

The purpose of this study was to explore weather coach-athlete compatibility is significantly related to athlete perception and evaluation of coaching behaviors, whether compatibility mediates relationships of anxiety and self-

Instrumentation used in this study were the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire (CBQ), the Sport Competition Anxiety Test (SCAT) and CSAI-2. Participants were also asked to rate their compatibility on a scale from 1-9 (9-being the highest).

The participants included 68 female collegiate basketball players from non-scholarship programs. All with at least one full season of playing experience

A correlational analysis was used to assess the relationship between athlete trait anxiety, state cognitive and somatic anxiety, state self-confidence, compatibility

Researchers found athletes who considered themselves highly compatible, rated their coach’s behavior positively, while athletes who are high in cognitive anxiety/self-

Researchers concluded with the notion that if the athletes’ goals, personality, and beliefs are consistent with those of their coach, the interaction of the individuals will likely be satisfactory to both parties producing a positive interpersonal atmosphere. Future research may benefit from a practical standpoint, for coaches, to develop good rapport and demonstrate support for their athletes as this should improve

57

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

confidence, and whether compatibility, trait anxiety, state anxiety and/or self-confidence can significantly predict athlete perception of coaching behavior.

Participants completed the questionnaires with coaches absent from the area then placed them into envelops and signed the seal, to ensure confidentiality.

with their coach. Participation was voluntary with permission and consent from coaches and athletes.

and total factor scores for the CBQ.

confidence rated coach’s behavior negatively. The outcome proved more negative rating in coaching behaviors than positive.

the coach-athlete interaction regardless of the casual direction of self-confidence/compatibility relationship.

Lee, H., Magunsen, M.J., & Cho, S. (2013). Strength coach-athlete compatibility: Roles of coaching behaviors and athlete gender. International Journal of Applied Sport Sciences Vol. 25 (No. 1). Pages 55-67.

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of gender on the influences of athletes perceived positive and negative strength and conditioning coach behaviors on strength coach-athlete compatibility, by exposing the ideology that athlete’s perceptions of their compatibilities with their coaches are undoubtedly linked to the coaching

Measures of supportive/emotional composure of negative activation from the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire were utilized to assess strength coaches negative and positive behaviors. As well as an assessment of compatibility in which player goals, personality and beliefs are perceived to be a match of their coaches, but self-rated on a scale of 1 (low) – 9 (high).

This study utilized a sample of 502 NCAA Division I athletes, after excluding 31 through a screening process, 471 was the final subject pool (270 males, 201 females). Varying in age and race, participants were members of softball, volleyball, and football teams.

Initially a MANOVA was conducted to check for potential manipulation biases and omission of underlying relationships. Following the statistical nature of the study, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed to examine the psychometric properties of the CBQ and

The results of the study found evidence of positive and negative behaviors that influenced athletes’ perceptions of coaching behaviors. Those that were positive.

In this study the relationship between positive and negative coaching behaviors was influenced by athlete gender, which was an unintentional result. Future research suggests that this study be sport specialized, across athletics to reveal what types of coaching behaviors impact student athletes by gender. It is common for women’s teams to have a male coach, or a female coach, but men’s teams have male coaches, therefore the relationship variance is examined differently across sports.

58

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

behaviors they experience.

Coach-athlete Questionnaire.

Myers, N.D., Vargas-Tonsing, T.M., Feltz, D.L. (2005). Caching efficacy in intercollegiate coaches: sources of, coaching behavior, and team variables. Psychology of Sport & Exercise Vol. 6. Pages 129-143.

The two primary purposes of this investigation were to examine the influence of proposed sources of efficacy information on dimensions of coaching efficacy for intercollegiate coaches, and to determine the influence of coaching efficacy on self-reported coaching behavior and team variables in men and women’s intercollegiate teams.

Data were collected twice for each participating team. First A questionnaire containing the Coaching Efficacy Scale, were sent to head coaches. Then a follow up phone call and electronic email which resulted in a 75% response rate. In the second data collection, both coaches and athletes were surveyed. Coaches completed questionnaires on their perceived frequency of their efficacy-enhancing behaviors, while athletes provided their perceptions of the head coach. Head coaches were asked to appoint someone not directly affiliated with the

Participants included 135 head coaches, who took part in Time 1 of the study, and 101 of those participated in Time 2, a total of 1618 athletes participated also. These athletes varied across sport and ranged between the ages of 18-26. All participants were members of NCAA Division II and III schools in the Midwest.

To determine the relationships between the sources and dimensions of coaching efficacy collected at Time 1, product-moment correlations were conducted. Thus, the influence of years as a collegiate coach, career-winning percentage, and perception of team ability on dimensions of coaching efficacy did not differ for males of

The findings of this study varied for both the male and female participants. For males, results supported previous research by demonstrating a relationship between the sources and dimensions of coaching efficacy, and the influence of Total Coaching Efficacy on self-reported coaching behavior and team variables. For female participants, findings extended previous research by

Across coaches, perception of support from athletes’ parents predicted the Character Building Efficacy, Technique Efficacy, and Motivational Efficacy. Across women’s teams the Total Coaching Efficacy predicted only coaches reported efficacy-enhancing behaviors with athletes, however the relationship between Total Coaching Efficacy and coaching behaviors was only significant for female coaches. Thus, across men’s and women’s teams, only when the sex of the male head coach matched the sex of the players did the learning and performance of the athletes predict coaching behaviors. Also. Across women’s teams the Total Coaching Efficacy did not predict team satisfaction. Only Motivational Efficacy was positively influenced. Additionally, it was considered that because the possibility of athletes’ gender bias, the moderation of coach’s gender

59

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

team to explain the study as well as to administer the questionnaires.

females. Also, a multivariate multiple regression analysis was conducted to determine the predictive strength of each of the proposed sources on dimensions of coaching efficacy.

identifying influences of specific dimensions of coaching efficacy for intercollegiate coaches, a moderating role for coach’s gender on the influence of perceived social support, and a moderating role for the coach’s gender on the influence of team satisfaction.

may not fully explain a relationship between a coach’s belief and team satisfaction.

Ruggiero, T.E. & Lattin, K.S. (2008). Intercollegiate female coaches’ use of verbally aggressive communication toward African American female athletes.

This study seeks to examine the nature of interpersonal communication between female intercollegiate coaches and African American female athletes through the lens of verbally aggressive

A qualitative descriptive design with a phenomenographic approach was utilized to examine African American female athlete’s perceptions of the influences of verbally aggressive

As the study was exclusive to participants who were women of African descent, each participant had to have previously played four

Data collection was done by one-on-one interviews during a three-month period in late 2001. The semi-structured interviews

Six categories were constructed from how participants perceived verbally aggressive communication from their female coaches:

Many of the participants shared experiences of enduring threatening verbally aggressive communication in the forms of punishment by loss of scholarships or early morning and extra practices. Debt was used on participants as a form of guilt, as if the athletes owed their coach something. The persuasion of negative feelings towards

60

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

Howard Journal of Communications Vol. 19 (No. 2). Pages 105-124.

communication. Like their male counterparts, hegemonic patterns of racial inequality through this use of communication was studies.

communication from their coaches. This approach was performed by open and semi-structured interviews, which made a distinction between first and second-order perspectives.

years of high school basketball, and had been a current member of a collegiate women’s basketball team. A total of eight women from NCAA Divisions I, II, and III institutions were observed.

began in an area of the participants choosing, with a casual conversation before the recorded interview. Each interview lasted approximately 2-3 hours, and was transcribed, then they were coded and categorized.

threat, debt, negative esteem, assertive stimulation, activation of impersonal commitments and activation of personal commitments.

oneself was found in all eight participants. One reported that self-doubt impacted her personally, her talent and athletic abilities. Punishment activities typically involved the coach seeking compliance in a negative manner, excessive running or difficult drills for long periods of time. Appealing to persons internalized commitments was true for three of the participants, and appealing to a person’s commitment to others was found as a negative communication tool as well. The descriptive categories that emerged from this study supported the notion that verbally aggressive communication were frequent and memorable aspects of the communication process between female collegiate coaches and African American female athletes, and included stereotyping and an increase in uncertainty among individual athletes.

Siekanska, M., Blecharz, J. & Wojtowicz, A.

The primary objective of this study was to focus

In a mixed methods examination, participants were

This study included 80 athletes, 44

The statistical analysis was done using the

The results revealed that females were

One of the unique findings suggests that high-expectancy athlete’s may perceive the

61

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

(2013). The athlete’s perception of coaches’ behaviors towards competitors with a different level. Journal of Behavioural Sciences in Sport Vol. 39. Pages 231-242.

on determining whether the athlete perceived any differences in coaching behaviors depending on whether the coach worked with a high or low-expectancy athletes. Secondly, to acquire an answer to the question of what coaching behaviors did athletes perceive as enhancing or inhibiting their sport development. Thirdly, to observe the types of relationships that were had between coaches and athletes.

asked to complete the Coaches’ Behaviors Survey then complete an exploratory question survey, such as a guided journaling of experiences. In Section 1 the questionnaire aimed to examine the degree to which the coach-athlete interaction affected their achievements and sport development. Section 2 addressed the participants’ opinions about the coach’s behavior toward the athletes with different sport skills. As well as to enumerate behaviors in favor of the athletes’ development and behaviors that hindered it.

males and 36 females, who represented both individual and team sports. Those who were identified as international athletes were placed into the high expectancy performance group (N=17), and the nationally recognized athletes (N=67) were placed into the low performance group.

Statistica 8.0 software. This calculated basic quantitative data to analyze variables and percentage values in the results. Qualitatively the open-ended responses of the Survey were categorized. Four themes emerged from this process: 1) results of the quantitative survey, 2) gender differences, 3) dependent variables and sport level, 4) exploratory responses that had not been

ready to build up a relationship and spend time with other members of their team, and paid more attention to coaching behaviors. Also, found in this study was the notion that coaching behavior towards more skilled athletes did not result in their enhanced sport growth, but was perceived as a hindrance. Additionally, athletes who were in the low-expectation group recorded excessive criticism, but could not see the

coaching behavior as inhibiting their athletic progress. Thus, to promote a broad development of the athlete we should adapt an interdisciplinary approach, which takes all enhancing and inhibiting aspects of athletic development into consideration. Coaches should not separate athletes into obvious groups of high and low-expectancy, rather crate drills and tasks that everyone can participate in, which will enhance the sport development of all included.

62

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

thought of beforehand.

same in their counterparts.

Williams, J.M., Jerome, G.J., Kenow, L.J., Rogers, T., Sartain, T.A., & Darland, G. (2003). Factor structure of the coaching behavior questionnaire and its relationship to athlete variables. The Sport Psychologist, Vol. 17, pages 16-34.

The purpose of this study was to reexamine the factor structure of the coaching behavior questionnaire by administering it to a large enough pool of diverse participants to conduct both an explanatory factor analysis and a confirmatory factor analysis. The article notes that there is little research on the topic, while it uses great reference to Smoll, and previous Kenow works; it is more of an ignition to intervention types of study. Testing took place prior to a practice session in the last third of the season, in most cases there were no

Quantitative instruments employed for data collection were the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire which consisted of a 21-question series set on a 4-point Likert scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree with no neutral option. The CSAI-2 was administered to evaluate self-confidence. Also, a Compatibility Questionnaire was included to see if the relationship between a coach and a player showed a difference in the CBQ.

The participants of this study were 484 athletes, (273-college) and (211-high school), who played basketball, softball, baseball, and volleyball, with a mean age of 17. Participants had almost one full season or more playing experience under their current head coach.

An Exploratory Factor Analysis was conducted via Statistical Package for Social Sciences, which was followed by a Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Correlational analyses were used to assess the relationship between the athletes’ evaluation of coaching behaviors on the two CBQ factors, and the athletes self-reported competitive

Across all sports, athletes who reported higher trait anxiety and lower self-confidence prior to competition, were more likely to perceive their coaches’ behaviors during competition as ones with a negative impact, as opposed to athletes who reported lower amounts of trait anxiety and high self-confidence.

It is discussed that if higher trait-anxious and cognitive and somatic-anxious athletes did interpret more coaching behaviors as threatening, then it is not surprising that these athletes would evaluate the coaching behaviors as having caused them more worry, distracted attention, elevated physiological arousal and poorer performance compared to athletes whose self-report indicated lower levels of anxiety. The preceding rationale also could explain the similar negative evaluation of coaching behaviors by athletes who lacked or had lower self-confidence.

63

Citation Purpose Methods & Procedures

Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/ Future Research

games within the testing dates.

trait anxiety, cognitive and somatic anxiety, state self-confidence and coach athlete compatibility.

64