Grounded in self-determination theory and the motivational model of the coach-athlete relationship, the purpose of this study was to explore the antecedents of youth sport coaches’ autonomy-supportive and controlling behaviours using a multimethod approach. Recreational level youth swimming and football coaches (N = 12) participated in semi-structured interviews and were observed leading a coaching session. Interviews were thematically analysed and coaching sessions were analysed using the multidimensional motivational climate observation system. Analysis of the triangulated data revealed that the coaches were both autonomy-supportive and controlling in their interactions with athletes, but predominantly autonomy-supportive. Coaches reported that they coached in this way due to factors associated with their personal orientation (significant others’ influence, learning experiences, and beliefs about the role of the coach), the coaching context (time pressure), and perceptions of athletes’ characteristics (readiness for autonomy, gender, and quality of motivation). The findings are discussed in relation to personal and social processes that may determine coaching behaviours, and suggestions for coach development and future research are noted.
MatosicDNtoumanisNQuestedE. Antecedents of need supportive and controlling interpersonal styles from a self-determination theory perspective: a review and implications for sport psychology research. In: Raab M, Wylleman P, Seiler R, et al. (eds) Sport and exercise psychology research: from theory to practice. 1st ed. London: Elsevier, 2016, pp. 145–180.
2.
RyanRMDeciEL.Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol2000;
55: 68–78.
Fraser-ThomasJCôtéJ.Understanding adolescents’ positive and negative developmental experiences in sport. Sport Psychol2009;
23: 3–23.
5.
SmithNQuestedEAppletonPR, et al.
Observing the coach-created motivational environment across training and competition in youth sport. J Sports Sci2017;
35: 149–158.
6.
TessierDSmithNTzioumakisY, et al.
Comparing the objective motivational climate created by grassroots soccer coaches in England, Greece and France. Int J Sport Exerc Psychol2013;
11: 365–383.
7.
OcchinoJLMallettCJRynneSB, et al.
Autonomy-supportive pedagogical approach to sports coaching: research, challenges and opportunities. Int J Sports Sci Coach2014;
9: 401–415.
8.
BartholomewKJNtoumanisNTh⊘Gersen-NtoumaniC.A review of controlling motivational strategies from a self-determination theory perspective: implications for sports coaches. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol2009;
2: 215–233.
9.
CoatsworthJDConroyDE.The effects of autonomy-supportive coaching, need satisfaction, and self-perceptions on initiative and identity in youth swimmers. Dev Psychol2009;
45: 320–328.
10.
CarpentierJMageauGA.When change-oriented feedback enhances motivation, well-being and performance: a look at autonomy-supportive feedback in sport. Psychol Sport Exerc2013;
14: 423–435.
11.
AlmagroBJSáenz-LópezPMorenoJA.Prediction of sport adherence through the influence of autonomy-supportive coaching among Spanish adolescent athletes. J Sports Sci Med2010;
9: 8–14.
12.
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.
13.
BalaguerIGonzálezLFabraP, et al.
Coaches’ interpersonal style, basic psychological needs and the well- and ill-being of young soccer players: a longitudinal analysis. J Sports Sci2012;
30: 1619–1629.
14.
PelletierLGFortierMSVallerandRJ, et al.
Associations among perceived autonomy support, forms of self-regulation, and persistence: a prospective study. Motiv Emot2001;
25: 279–306.
15.
QuestedEDudaJL.Antecedents of burnout among elite dancers: a longitudinal test of basic needs theory. Psychol Sport Exerc2011;
12: 159–167.
16.
BartholomewKJNtoumanisNRyanRM, et al.
Self-determination theory and diminished functioning: the role of interpersonal control and psychological need thwarting. Pers Soc Psychol Bull2011;
37: 1459–1473.
17.
HodgeKLonsdaleC.Prosocial and antisocial behavior in sport: the role of coaching style, autonomous vs. controlled motivation, and moral disengagement. J Sport Exerc Psychol2011;
33: 527–547.
18.
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.
19.
TaylorIMNtoumanisNStandageM.A self-determination theory approach to understanding antecedents of teachers’ motivational strategies in physical education. J Sport Exerc Psychol2008;
30: 75–94.
20.
ByrneK.Developing an autonomy-supportive learning environment: improving coaching practice through action research. Master’s Thesis, The University of Queensland, Australia, 2010.
21.
RocchiMPelletierLG.The antecedents of coaches’ interpersonal behaviors: the role of the coaching context, coaches’ psychological needs, and coaches’ motivation. J Sport Exerc Psychol2017;
39: 366–378.
22.
MallettCJ.Self-determination theory: a case study of evidence-based coaching. Sport Psychol2005;
19: 417–429.
23.
AhlbergMMallettCJTinningR.Developing autonomy supportive coaching behaviours: an action research approach to coach development. Int J Coach Sci2008;
2: 3–22.
24.
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.
25.
RocchiMAPelletierLGCoutureAL.Determinants of coach motivation and autonomy supportive coaching behaviours. Psychol Sport Exerc2013;
14: 852–859.
26.
IachiniAL.Development and empirical examination of a model of factors influencing coaches provision of autonomy-support. Int J Sports Sci Coach2013;
8: 661–675.
27.
StraussACorbinJ.Basics of qualitative research: procedures and techniques for developing grounded theory.
Thousand Oaks:
Sage, 1998.
28.
CowanDTTaylorIMMcEwanHE, et al.
Bridging the gap between self-determination theory and coaching soccer to disadvantaged youth. J Appl Sport Psychol2012;
24: 361–374.
FontanaAFreyJH.The interview: from structured questions to negotiated text. In: DenzinNKLincolnYS (eds) Handbook of qualitative research. 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks:
Sage, 2000, pp.645–672.
31.
SmithNTessierDTzioumakisY, et al.
Development and validation of the multidimensional motivational climate observation system. J Sport Exerc Psychol2015;
37: 4–22.
32.
NichollsJG.The competitive ethos and democratic education.
Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1989.
33.
HulteenRMSmithJJMorganPJ, et al.
Global participation in sport and leisure-time physical activities: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prev Med2017;
95: 14–25.
34.
VaismoradiMTurunenHBondasT.Content analysis and thematic analysis: implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nurs Health Sci2013;
15: 398–405.
35.
SparksCDimmockJAWhippPR, et al.
Getting connected”: high school physical education teacher behaviors that facilitate students’ relatedness support perceptions. Sport Exerc Perform Psychol2015;
4: 219–236.
36.
BraunVClarkeV. Thematic analysis. In: Cooper H, Camic PM, Long DL, et al. (eds) APA handbooks in psychology® APA handbook of research methods in psychology, vol. 2. research designs: quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. Washington: American Psychological Association, 2012, pp. 57–71.
37.
CreswellJWMillerDL.Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Pract2000;
39: 124–130.
38.
PattonMQ.Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry: a personal, experiential perspective. Qual Social Work2002;
1: 261–283.
39.
CassidyTGJonesRLPotracP.Understanding sports coaching: the social, cultural and pedagogical foundations of coaching practice.
Abingdon:
Routledge, 2008.
40.
LemyreFTrudelPDurand-BushN.How youth-sport coaches learn to coach. Sport Psychol2007;
21: 191–209.
41.
CushionCJArmourKMJonesRL.Coach education and continuing professional development: experience and learning to coach. Quest2003;
55: 215–230.
42.
JonesRLArmourKMPotracP.Constructing expert knowledge: a case study of a top-level professional soccer coach. Sport Educ Soc2003;
8: 213–229.
43.
GilbertWDTrudelP.Learning to coach through experience: conditions that influence reflection. Phys Educ2005;
62: 32–43.
44.
StoszkowskiJCollinsD.Communities of practice, social learning and networks: exploiting the social side of coach development. Sport Educ Soc2014;
19: 773–788.
45.
KohKTLeeTPLimSH.The internet as a source of learning for youth soccer coaches. Int J Sports Sci Coach2018;
13: 278–289.
46.
StoszkowskiJCollinsD.Sources, topics and use of knowledge by coaches. J Sports Sci2016;
34: 794–802.
47.
CassidyTRossiT.Situating learning: (re)examining the notion of apprenticeship in coach education. Int J Sports Sci Coach2006;
1: 235–246.
48.
DudaJLQuestedEHaugE, et al.
Promoting adolescent health through an intervention aimed at improving the quality of their participation in physical activity (PAPA): background to the project and main trial protocol. Int J Sport Exerc Psychol2013;
11: 319–327.
49.
LanganETonerJBlakeC, et al.
Testing the effects of a self-determination theory-based intervention with youth Gaelic football coaches on athlete motivation and burnout. Sport Psychol2015;
29: 293–301.
50.
SuY-LReeveJ.A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intervention programs designed to support autonomy. Educ Psychol Rev2011;
23: 159–188.
51.
PotracPJonesRArmourK.“It’s all about getting respect”: the coaching behaviors of an expert English soccer coach. Sport Educ Soc2002;
7: 183–202.
52.
NashCSSprouleJHortonP.Sport coaches’ perceived role frames and philosophies. Int J Sports Sci Coach2008;
3: 539–554.
53.
GilbertWDTrudelP.Role of the coach: how model youth team sport coaches frame their roles. Sport Psychol2004;
18: 21–43.
54.
CooperDAllenJ.“I don’t want to give them my brain for the day … and then take it back”: an examination of the coach-created motivational climate in adult adventure sports. Int Sport Coach J2020;
7: 175–188.
55.
CôtéJGilbertW.An integrative definition of coaching effectiveness and expertise. Int J Sports Sci Coach2009;
4: 307–323.
56.
International Council of Coaching Excellence (ICCE), Association of Summer Olympic International Federations (ASOIF) and Leeds Beckett University. International sport coaching framework version 1.2, www.icce.ws/_assets/files/iscf-1.2-10-7-15.pdf (2013, accessed 28 August 2020).
57.
HenriksenKStambulovaN. Creating optimal environments for talent development: a holistic ecological approach. In: Baker J, Cobley S, Schorer J, et al. (eds) Routledge handbook of talent identification and development in sport. Abingdon: Routledge, 2017, pp. 271–284.
58.
SouzaADOslinJ.A player-centered approach to coaching. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance2008;
79: 24–30.
59.
PillS.Perspectives on athlete-centred coaching.
Abingdon:
Routledge, 2017.
60.
VansteenkisteMSierensEGoossensL, et al.
Identifying configurations of perceived teacher autonomy support and structure: associations with self-regulated learning, motivation and problem behavior. Learn Inst2012;
22: 431–439.
61.
ReeveJ.Self-determination theory applied to educational settings. In: DeciELRyanRM (eds) Handbook of self-determination research.
Rochester:
University of Rochester Press, 2002, pp. 183–203.
62.
MartinSBDaleGAJacksonA.Youth coaching preferences of adolescent athletes and their parents. J Sport Behav2001;
24: 197–212.
63.
SharmaR.Preferred leadership behaviours of male and female badminton players. Int J Sci Cult Sports2015;
3: 73–83.
64.
AdieJWDudaJLNtoumanisN.Autonomy support, basic need satisfaction and the optimal functioning of adult male and female sport participants: a test of basic needs theory. Motiv Emot2008;
32: 189–199.
65.
BeamJWSerwatkaTSWilsonWJ.Preferred leadership of NCAA division I and II intercollegiate student-athletes. J Sport Behav2004;
27: 3–17.
66.
TerryPCHoweBL.The coaching preferences of elite athletes competing at Universiade’83. Can J Appl Sport Sci1984;
9: 201–208.
67.
ChelladuraiPSalehSD.Preferred leadership in sports. Can J Appl Sport Sci1978;
3: 85–92.
68.
ShermanCAFullerRSpeedHD.Gender comparisons of preferred coaching behaviors in Australian sports. J Sport Behav2000;
23: 389–406.
69.
DeciELRyanRM.The general causality orientations scale: self-determination in personality. J Res Personal1985;
19: 109–134.
70.
BemSLRubleDNSzkrybaloJ.Gender schema theory: a cognitive account of sex typing. Psychol Rev1981;
88: 354–364.
71.
MartinCLRubleDNSzkrybaloJ.Cognitive theories of early gender development. Psychol Bull2002;
128: 903–933.
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.
74.
LyonsMRynneSBMallettCJ.Reflection and the art of coaching: fostering high-performance in olympic ski cross. Reflect Pract2012;
13: 359–372.
75.
AllenJBReidC.Scaffolding women coaches’ development: a programme to build coaches’ competence and confidence. Women Sport Phys Act J2019;
27: 101–109.
76.
KawulichBB.Participant observation as a data collection method. Forum Qual Soc Res2005;
6: 1–22.
77.
SmithNQuestedEAppletonPR, et al.
A review of observational instruments to assess the motivational environment in sport and physical education settings. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol2016;
9: 134–159.
