Reynders B, Van Puyenbroeck S, Ceulemans E, Vansteenkiste M, Vande Broek G. How Do Profiles of Need-Supportive and Controlling Coaching Relate to Team Athletes' Motivational Outcomes? A Person-Centered Approach.
JOURNAL OF SPORT & EXERCISE PSYCHOLOGY 2020;
42:452-462. [PMID:
33176275 DOI:
10.1123/jsep.2019-0317]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2019] [Revised: 06/18/2020] [Accepted: 06/19/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
Building on recent self-determination theory research differentiating controlling coaching into a demanding and domineering approach, this study examined the role of both approaches in athletes' motivational outcomes when accompanied by autonomy support or structure. Within team-sport athletes (N = 317; mean age = 17.67), four sets of k-means cluster analyses systematically pointed toward a four-cluster solution (e.g., high-high, high-low, low-high, and low-low), regardless of the pair of coaching dimensions used. One of the identified coaching profiles involved coaches who are perceived to combine need-supportive and controlling behaviors (i.e., high-high). Whereas combining need-supportive and domineering behaviors (i.e., high-high) yields lower autonomous motivation and engagement compared with a high need-support profile (i.e., high-low), this is less the case for the combination of need-supportive and demanding behaviors (i.e., high-high). This person-centered approach provides deeper insights into how coaches combine different styles and how some forms of controlling coaching yield a greater cost than others.
Collapse