ORIGINAL PAPER
Coach-athlete relationship, team cohesion and motivation in Brazilian youth athletes: a cluster analysis
1
Physical Education College, Federal University of Vale do São Francisco, Petrolina, Brazil
2
Physical Education College, State University of Maringá, Maringá, Brazil
3
Physical Education College, State University of Amazonas, Manaus, Brazil
Submission date: 2021-03-25
Acceptance date: 2022-06-04
Publication date: 2022-07-05
Hum Mov. 2023;24(3):44-53
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Purpose:
This study investigated whether coach-athlete relationship development through sport was influenced by demographic factors, team cohesion, and motivation variables in Brazilian youth sport participants.
Methods:
The research involved 301 young athletes (136 boys and 165 girls) participating in the final phase of the School Games. They were aged 14–17 years (mean: 16.03 ± 0.83 years). The survey used assessed demographic variables, the Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire, the Sport Motivation Scale, and the Youth Sport Environment Questionnaire. The data were investigated with a cluster analysis, chi-squared test, and multivariate analysis of variance (p < 0.05).
Results:
The study revealed more female participants in the high coach relationship cluster (p = 0.010), as well as a stronger association of futsal and handball with high coach-athlete relationship quality, and of basketball with low coach-athlete relationship quality (p = 0.002). When compared with the low coach relationship cluster, youth sport participants in the high coach relationship cluster presented higher scores for social cohesion (p = 0.001), task cohesion (p = 0.001), and autonomous motivation regulations (p: 0.003–0.001).
Conclusions:
Such findings suggest that coaches should seek to encourage group cohesion for both task and social cohesion, thus motivating athletes to meet the demands of the sporting context.
This study investigated whether coach-athlete relationship development through sport was influenced by demographic factors, team cohesion, and motivation variables in Brazilian youth sport participants.
Methods:
The research involved 301 young athletes (136 boys and 165 girls) participating in the final phase of the School Games. They were aged 14–17 years (mean: 16.03 ± 0.83 years). The survey used assessed demographic variables, the Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire, the Sport Motivation Scale, and the Youth Sport Environment Questionnaire. The data were investigated with a cluster analysis, chi-squared test, and multivariate analysis of variance (p < 0.05).
Results:
The study revealed more female participants in the high coach relationship cluster (p = 0.010), as well as a stronger association of futsal and handball with high coach-athlete relationship quality, and of basketball with low coach-athlete relationship quality (p = 0.002). When compared with the low coach relationship cluster, youth sport participants in the high coach relationship cluster presented higher scores for social cohesion (p = 0.001), task cohesion (p = 0.001), and autonomous motivation regulations (p: 0.003–0.001).
Conclusions:
Such findings suggest that coaches should seek to encourage group cohesion for both task and social cohesion, thus motivating athletes to meet the demands of the sporting context.
REFERENCES (40)
1.
Jowett S. Coaching effectiveness: the coach-athlete relationship at its heart. Curr Opin Psychol. 2017;16:154–158; doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.05.006.
2.
Jowett S, Adie JW, Bartholomew KJ, Yang SX, Gustafsson H, Lopez-Jiménez A. Motivational processes in the coach-athlete relationship: a multi-cultural selfdetermination approach. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2017;32:143–152; doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2017.06.004.
3.
Jowett S, Kanakoglou K, Passmore J. The application of the 3+1Cs relationship model in executive coaching. Consult Psychol J Pract Res. 2012;64(3):183–197; doi: 10.1037/a0030316.
4.
Fiorese L, Pizzo GC, Contreira AR, Lazier-Leão TR, Moreira CR, Rigoni PAG, et al. Association between motivation and group cohesion in professional football: is the coach-athlete relationship a determining factor? [in Portuguese]. Rev Psicol Deporte. 2017;27(Suppl. 1):51–57.
5.
Do Nascimento Junior JRA, da Silva EC, Freire GLM, Granja CTL, da Silva AA, de Oliveira DV. Athlete’s motivation and the quality of his relationship with the coach [in Spanish]. Apunt Educ Fis Deportes. 2020;142:21–28; doi: 10.5672/apunts.2014-0983.es.(2020/4).142.03.
6.
Jowett GE, Mallinson SH, Hill AP. An independent effects approach to perfectionism in sport, dance, and exercise. In: Hill AP (ed.), The psychology of perfectionism in sport, dance, and exercise. London: Routledge; 2016; 85–149.
7.
Kim H-D, Cruz AB. The influence of coaches’ leadership styles on athletes’ satisfaction and team cohesion: a meta-analytic approach. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2016;11(6):900–909; doi: 10.1177/1747954116676117.
8.
Nascimento-Júnior JRA, Vissoci JRN, Codonhato R, Fortes LS, Oliveira DV, Oliveira LP, et al. Effect of the coaches’ leadership style perceived by athletes on team cohesion among elite Brazilian futsal players. Cuad Psicol Deporte. 2018;18(3):252–267.
9.
Isoard-Gautheur S, Trouilloud D, Gustafsson H, Guillet-Descas E. Associations between the perceived quality of the coach-athlete relationship and athlete burnout: an examination of the mediating role of achievement goals. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2016;22:210–217; doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.003.
10.
Cheuczuk F, Ferreira L, Flores PP, Vieira LF, Vieira JLL, do Nascimento Junior JRA. Quality of the relationship coach-athlete and goal orientation as predictors of sport performance [in Portuguese]. Psic Teor Pesq. 2016;32(2):1–8; doi: 10.1590/0102-3772e32229.
11.
Hampson R, Jowett S. Effects of coach leadership and coach-athlete relationship on collective efficacy. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2014;24(2):454–460; doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2012.01527.x.
12.
Freitas AFL, Contreira AR, Xavier CC, Faria JG, Ribas ML, Fiorese L, et al. The coach-athlete relationship and hope of university athletes of individual modalities from Paraná [in Portuguese]. Res Soc Dev. 2020;9(9):e770997636; doi: 10.33448/rsd-v9i9.7636.
13.
Nicholls AR, Perry JL. Perceptions of coach-athlete relationship are more important to coaches than athletes in predicting dyadic coping and stress appraisals: an actor-partner independence mediation model. Front Psychol. 2016;7:447; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00447.
14.
Tojari F, Soheili B, Manouchehri J. Validation of an instrument for measuring coach-athlete relationship in Iranian sport leagues. Adv Environ Biol. 2013;7(14):4667–4670.
15.
Jowett S. Interdependence analysis and the 3+1Cs in the coach-athlete relationship. In: Jowett S, Lavallee D (eds.), Social psychology in sport. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2007; 15–27.
16.
Contreira AR. The mediated impact of coach-athlete relationship in basic psychology needs satisfaction and athletic satisfaction from coaches and Brazilian athletes [in Portuguese]. Maringá: Universidade Estadual de Maringá; 2016.
17.
Jowett S, Chaundy V. An investigation into the impact of coach leadership and coach-athlete relationship on group cohesion. Group Dyn Theory Res Pract. 2004;8(4):302–311; doi: 10.1037/1089-2699.8.4.302.
18.
Do Nascimento Junior JRA, Silva AA, Granja CTL, de Oliveira DV, de Sousa Fortes L. Do sporting experiences predict team cohesion in youth athletes? Cuad Psicol Deporte. 2019;19(3):102–112; doi: 10.6018/cpd.365201.
19.
Carron AV, Brawley LR. Cohesion: conceptual and measurement issues. Small Group Res. 2012;43(6):726–743; doi: 10.1177/1046496412468072.
20.
Jowett S, Poczwardowski A. Understanding the coachathlete relationship. In: Jowett S, Lavallee D (eds.), Social psychology in sport. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2007; 3–14.
21.
Contreira AR, do Nascimento Junior JRA, Pizzo GC, Sitoe SA, Moreira CR, Jowett S, et al. Psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of the Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire for coaches. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2019;14(3):285–293; doi: 10.1177/1747954119832715.
22.
Jowett S, Meek GA. The coach-athlete relationship in married couples: an exploratory content analysis. Sport Psychol. 2000;14(2):157–175; doi: 10.1123/tsp.14.2.157.
23.
Davis L, Appleby R, Davis P, Wetherell M, Gustafsson H. The role of coach-athlete relationship quality in team sport athletes’ psychophysiological exhaustion: implications for physical and cognitive performance. J Sports Sci. 2018;36(17):1985–1992; doi: 10.1080/02640414.2018.1429176.
24.
Contreira AR, Caruzzo NM, Aizava PVS, Passos PCB, Fiorese L. Coach-athlete relationship and associated background factors: an analysis in Brazilian coaches. Res Soc Dev. 2020;9(7):561974448; doi: 10.33448/rsd-v9i7.4448.
25.
Jowett S, Ntoumanis N. The Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART-Q): development and initial validation. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2004;14(4):245–257; doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2003.00338.x.
26.
Vieira LF, do Nascimento Junior JRA, Pujals C, Jowett S, Codonhato R, Vissoci JRN. Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Brazilian Coach-Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (CART-Q) – athlete version. Rev Bras Cineantropom Desempenho Hum. 2015;17(6):635–649; doi: 10.5007/1980-0037.2015v17n6p635.
27.
Hair JF, Risher JJ, Sarstedt M, Ringle CM. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur Bus Rev. 2019;31(1):2–24; doi: 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203.
28.
Pelletier LG, Rocchi MA, Vallerand RJ, Deci EL, Ryan RM. Validation of the revised Sport Motivation Scale (SMS-II). Psychol Sport Exerc. 2013;14(3):329–341; doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.12.002.
29.
Do Nascimento Junior JRA, Vissoci JRN, Balbim GM, Moreira CR, Pelletier L, Vieira LF. Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties analysis of the Sport Motivation Scale-II for the Brazilian context. Rev Educ Fis. 2014;25(3):441–458; doi: 10.4025/reveducfis.v25i3.24855.
30.
Vicent M, Sanmartín R, Vásconez-Rubio O, García-Fernández JM. Perfectionism profiles and motivation to exercise based on self-determination theory. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(9):3206; doi: 10.3390/ijerph17093206.
31.
Eys M, Loughead T, Bray SR, Carron AV. Development of a cohesion questionnaire for youth: the Youth Sport Environment Questionnaire. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2009;31(3):390–408; doi: 10.1123/jsep.31.3.390.
32.
Do Nascimento Junior JRA, Granja CTL, de Sousa Fortes L, Freire GLM, de Oliveira DV, Peixoto EM. Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the Youth Sport Environment Questionnaire (P-YSEQ). J Phys Educ Sport. 2018;18(3):1606–1614; doi: 10.7752/jpes.2018.03236.
33.
Tamminen KA, Page-Gould E, Schellenberg B, Palmateer T, Thai S, Sabiston CM, et al. A daily diary study of interpersonal emotion regulation, the social environment, and team performance among University athletes. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2019;45:101566; doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2019.101566.
34.
Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;112(1):155–159; doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155.
35.
Cumming J, Duda JL. Profiles of perfectionism, body-related concerns, and indicators of psychological health in vocational dance students: an investigation of the 2×2 model of perfectionism. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2012;13(6):729–738; doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.05.004.
36.
Rottensteiner C, Konttinen N, Laakso L. Sustained participation in youth sports related to coach-athlete relationship and coach-created motivational climate. Int Sport Coach J. 2015;2(1):29–38; doi: 10.1123/iscj.2014-0060.
37.
Rigby CS, Ryan RM. Self-determination theory in human resource development: new directions and practical considerations. Adv Dev Hum Resour. 2018;20(2):133–147; doi: 10.1177/1523422318756954.
38.
Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory: basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York: The Guilford Press; 2017.
39.
Felton L, Jowett S, Begg C, Zhong X. A multistudy examination of the complementarity dimension of the coach-athlete relationship. Sport Exerc Perform Psychol. 2021;10(1):27–42; doi: 10.1037/spy0000209.
40.
Freire GLM, da Silva EC, Granja CTL, de Oliveira DV, Codonhato R, do Nascimento Junior JRA. Is the quality of the relationship with the coach important for boys and girls in school sports? Saud Pesq. 2021;14(4):e8102; doi: 10.17765/2176-9206.2021v14n4e8102.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1899-1955 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
