The relationship between passion for coaching and the coaches’ interpersonal behaviors: The mediating role of coaches’ perception of the relationship quality with athletes
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online August, 2019
The relationship between passion for coaching and the coaches’ interpersonal behaviors: The mediating role of coaches’ perception of the relationship quality with athletes
According to Self-Determination Theory, sports coaches’ autonomy-supportive behaviors positively influence athletes’ different aspects, such as motivation, well-being, and performance, while controlling behaviors of coaches tend to diminish such variables. Although many researchers agree that autonomy-supportive coaching style should be promoted rather than a controlling style, there is scarce research investigating the antecedents of such behavioral styles. The aim of this study was to examine a model of potential determinants of coaches’ interpersonal behaviors by investigating the relationship between passion for coaching and their behavioral styles and verifying the mediating role of coaches’ perceived relationship quality with their athletes. A total of 172 coaches participated in the survey, and data sets were analyzed using structural model analysis. Results revealed that coaches’ harmonious passion positively predicted autonomy-supportive behaviors but negatively predicted controlling behaviors, and these pathways were mediated by coaches’ perception of the relationship with their athletes. The implications for coaches and researchers from those results are discussed.
Mallet CJ and Ntoumanis N. Motivation in sport: A self-determination theory perspective. In: Routledge companion to sport and exercise psychology: Global perspectives and fundamental concepts (ed Deci EL and Ryan RM). Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2014, pp. 67–82.
2.
DeciELRyanRM. The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. J Res Pers1985; 19: 109–134.
3.
RyanRMDeciEL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol2000; 55: 68.
4.
DeciELRyanRM. The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol Inq2000; 11: 227–268.
5.
AmoroseAJAnderson-ButcherD. Autonomy-supportive coaching and self-determined motivation in high school and college athletes: A test of self-determination theory. Psychol Sport Exerc2007; 8: 654–670.
6.
ConroyDECoatsworthJD. Assessing autonomy-supportive coaching strategies in youth sport. Psychol Sport Exerc2007; 8: 671–684.
7.
GagneM. Autonomy support and need satisfaction in the motivation and well-being of gymnasts. J Appl Sport Psychol2003; 15: 372–390.
8.
PelletierLGFortierMSVallerRJ, et al.Associations among perceived autonomy support, forms of self-regulation, and persistence: A prospective study. Motiv Emot2001; 25: 279–306.
9.
BartholomewKJNtoumanisNThøgersen-NtoumaniC. The controlling interpersonal style in a coaching context: Development and initial validation of a psychometric scale. J Sport Exerc Psychol2010; 32: 193–216.
10.
StebbingsJTaylorIMSprayCM, et al.Antecedents of perceived coach interpersonal behaviors: The coaching environment and coach psychological well-and ill-being. J Sport Exerc Psychol2012; 34: 481–502.
11.
Matosic D, Ntoumanis N and Quested E. Antecedents of need supportive and controlling interpersonal styles from a self-determination theory perspective: A review and implications for sport psychology research. In: Sport and exercise psychology research: From theory to practice (ed Raab M, Wylleman P, Seiler R, Elbe AM, and Hatzigeorgiadis A). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, 2016, pp. 145–180.
12.
VallerandRJ. On the psychology of passion: In search of what makes people’s lives most worth living. Can Psychol/Psychologie Canadienne2008; 49: 1.
13.
VallerandRJ. Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Adv Exp Soc Psychol1997; 29: 271–360.
14.
VallerandRJBlanchardCMageauGA, et al.Les passions de l'ame: On obsessive and harmonious passion. J Pers Soc Psychol2003; 85: 756.
15.
MageauGAVallerandRJCharestJ, et al.On the development of harmonious and obsessive passion: The role of autonomy support, activity specialization, and identification with the activity. J Pers2009; 77: 601–646.
16.
Hodgins HS and Knee CR. The integrating self and conscious experience. In: Handbook of self-determination research (ed Deci EL and Ryan RM). 2002, pp. 87–100. NY: University of Rochester Press.
17.
Seguin-LevesqueCLaliberteaMLNPelletierLG, et al.Harmonious and obsessive passion for the Internet: Their associations with the couple's relationship. J Appl Soc Psychol2003; 33: 197–221.
18.
SmollFLSmithRE. Leadership behaviors in sport: A theoretical model and research paradigm. J Appl Soc Psychol1989; 19: 1522–1551.
19.
LafrenièreM-AKJowettSVallerandRJ, et al.Passion in sport: On the quality of the coach–athlete relationship. J Sport Exerc Psychol2008; 30: 541–560.
20.
PhilippeFLVallerandRJHoulfortN, et al.Passion for an activity and quality of interpersonal relationships: The mediating role of emotions. J Pers Soc Psychol2010; 98: 917.
21.
BureauJSVallerandRJNtoumanisN, et al.On passion and moral behavior in achievement settings: The mediating role of pride. Motiv Emot2013; 37: 121–133.
22.
PhilippeFLVallerandRJRicherI, et al.Passion for driving and aggressive driving behavior: A look at their relationship. J Appl Soc Psychol2009; 39: 3020–3043.
23.
YooJChungK-N. Analysis of the dualistic passion model in dance. Korean Soc Sport Psychol2008; 19: 163–175.
24.
WilliamsGCGrowVMFreedmanZR, et al.Motivational predictors of weight loss and weight-loss maintenance. J Pers Soc Psychol1996; 70: 115.
SongY-GCheonSH. Development and Validation of Controlling Coach Behaviors Scale. Korean J Sport Psychol2012; 23: 111–123.
27.
KimKParkJ. Structural validation of the Korean version of Coach–Athlete Relationship Questionnaire (KrCART-Q). Korean J Phys Educ2008; 47: 219–233.
28.
JowettSNtoumanisN. The coach–athlete relationship questionnaire (CART-Q): Development and initial validation. Scand J Med Sci Sports2004; 14: 245–257.
29.
JowettS. Validating coach–athlete relationship measures with the nomological network. Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci2009; 13: 34–51.
30.
McAllisterDJ. Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Acad Manage J1995; 38: 24–59.
31.
SettoonRPMossholderKW. Relationship quality and relationship context as antecedents of person-and task-focused interpersonal citizenship behavior. J Appl Psychol2002; 87: 255.
32.
JohnsonKJFredricksonBL. “We all look the same to me” Positive emotions eliminate the own-race bias in face recognition. Psychol Sci2005; 16: 875–881.
33.
WaughCEFredricksonBL. Nice to know you: Positive emotions, self–other overlap, and complex understanding in the formation of a new relationship. J Posit Psychol2006; 1: 93–106.
34.
LafrenièreM-AKJowettSVallerandRJ, et al.Passion for coaching and the quality of the coach–athlete relationship: The mediating role of coaching behaviors. Psychol Sport Exerc2011; 12: 144–152.
35.
CarpentierJMageauGA. Predicting sport experience during training: The role of change-oriented feedback in athletes’ motivation, self-confidence and needs satisfaction fluctuations. J Sport Exerc Psychol2016; 38: 45–58.
36.
GilletNVallerandRJAmouraS, et al.Influence of coaches’ autonomy support on athletes’ motivation and sport performance: A test of the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Psychol Sport Exerc2010; 11: 155–161.
37.
MageauGAVallerandRJ. The coach–athlete relationship: A motivational model. J Sports Sci2003; 21: 883–904.
38.
ReinbothMDudaJLNtoumanisN. Dimensions of coaching behavior, need satisfaction, and the psychological and physical welfare of young athletes. Motiv Emot2004; 28: 297–313.
