Burrow 1

Nick Burrow Mrs. Hinnant Annotative Bibliography

"A Strong Coach-Athlete Relationship Is Associated With Achievement Goals And Intrinsic Motivation." Journal Of Sport & Exercise Psychology 33.1 (2011): 163-164. Academic Search Complete. Web. 31 Mar. 2014 The article A Strong Coach-Athlete Relationship Is Associated with Achievement Goals and Intrinsic Motivation analyzes a previous study called Meta-perceptions of the coach-athlete relationship. Achievement goals and intrinsic motivation among sport participants put together by authors Adie and Jowett which examined the potential links between the coach-athlete relationship, achievement goal adoption, and intrinsic motivation.(163) The article summarizes the study by saying the authors tested a theoretical model in which the association between athletes' meta-perceptions of the coach-athlete relationship and athletes' intrinsic motivation for sport participation was mediated by achievement goal adoption the authors tested this through the use of three questionnaires, which included CAR-Q, Achievement Goal Questionnaire for Sport, and Sport Motivation Scale questionnaire. The results indicated that athletes prefer mastery approach goals which is striving to achieve competence in a task (164) rather than performance avoidance goals which is someone trying to prove they are not incompetent at the task at hand. The author states that if athletes perceive their relationship with their coach to be strong and secure then they are more likely to pursue mastery approach goals(164) through my research I would concur with this statement because where an athlete stands with his coach can be stressful, which can lead to a decline in the players athletic performance. If an athletes relationship with their coach is on the rocks it can take away from the players focus towards their motivation and performance. The author also states that in the pursuit of these goals (mastery approach) they (the players) are more likely to be intrinsically motivated in their sport (164) I agree with this statement as well observing the Hough football team as athletes achieved competence in their task it continually motivated them to keep improving their game in other areas. This article will not do much for my argument but it can provide information for the preparation stage of my paper by offering an alternative coaching method other than the one used by the Hough football staff. Hampson, R., and S. Jowett. "Effects Of Coach Leadership And Coach-Athlete Relationship On Collective Efficacy." Scandinavian Journal Of Medicine & Science In Sports 24.2 (2014): 454460. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Mar. 2014. This article can be summed up by just reading the title, Effects of coach leadership and coachathlete relationship on collective efcacy. Collective efficacy is a big part of this article, the definition of collective efficacy is a groups shared condence in their conjoint capabilities to successfully organize and perform collective tasks.(454) Hampson and Jowett put together a

Burrow 2

study that tries to show how a coachs leadership and their relationship with their players effects the team in terms of collective efficacy. It is known that a positive collective efficacy will contribute greatly to a teams performance. This research is meant to study contributing factors that effect a teams collective efficacy in a positive manor. After reading Hampson and Jowetts study and looking back upon my observations I agree with their findings to a certain point. I believe that collective efficacy plays a big part in a teams success. I think would have been more affective if they went about their research in a different fashion. I think the study would be more effective if they researched entire teams rather than individual players like they did. Through my observations I noticed that the players seemed motivated to get their job done by Coach Collins. Players that were on bad terms with Collins seemed more reluctant to be fully committed to the team. Collins leadership and the relationships he kept with his players boosted the teams collective efficacy which in turn helped turn Hough into a top program. I think that studying entire teams would also help them find other contributing factors of a teams collective efficacy. I plan to use the article Effects of coach leadership and coachathlete relationship on collective efcacy to further strengthen my point on how a coach is a leader to his players. My argument is that the relationship between players and coaches is a constantly evolving multidimensional relationship. A coach is a lot of things to his players and a leader is one of them. This study helped me see that a coach should have transformational leadership. Transformational leaders focus on and care about followers and their personal needs and development.(455) For a coach being a transformational leader can have many can have a positive impact on his players according to Hampson stating that the followers of transformational leaders feel trust, admiration, loyalty, and respect for the leader, and because of the qualities of the transformational leader (i.e., personality, traits, and abilities), are willing to work harder than is ordinarily expected.(455) Collins is a type of transformational leader and his players hold a tremendous amount of respect and admiration for him. Never once did it appear that they wouldnt follow him into battle and did put their full trust in him. HUNHYUK, CHOI, CHO SEONGKWAN, and HUH JINYOUNG. "The Association Between The Perceived Coach--Athlete Relationship And Athletes' Basic Psychological Needs." Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal 41.9 (2013): 1547-1556. Academic Search Complete. Web. 30 Mar. 2014. The article The Association Between the Perceived Coach--Athlete Relationship and Athletes' Basic Psychological Needs was a study that assesses the three Cs of the coach-athlete relationship and how they coincide with athletes three basic psychological needs. The three Cs are closeness which deals with trust and respect, commitment, and complementarity which is cooperative interactions between each other.(1548) The three basic psychological needs are competence, autonomy, and relatedness. Through questionnaire called the KrCAR-Q given to three hundred twenty eight Korean collegiate athletes the authors found that the three Cs were correlated positively with all basic psychological needs except relatedness.

Burrow 3

Reading this article I found that although the CAR-Q has been tested and proven to be an effective method for experimenting, that observational research should be accounted for. The CAR-Q is a questionnaire which means the results may not be accurate because athletes may not have taken it seriously. In my observations of the Hough football team I would say that competence was the most important psychological need followed by autonomy. Relatedness should not be in the discussion because it is an implied part of the relationship. Relationships are formed for a specific purpose that purpose forms into the relatedness of the group or members of a certain relationship. Overall I think that this study was put together poorly. Although there is not a lot of information that I could pull from this article certain points made from the study could be beneficial to my ethnography. One piece of information I can use from this article is the quote how athletes perceive and evaluate their relationship with their coach affects attitude, motivation, and even emotional responses.(1552) This statement by the author shows how important a good relationship between players and coaches is and the effects that it takes on the players. This factors into my argument by showing that players also hold tremendous weight in defining the relationship between player and coach. Relationships are two way streets and in order for traffic to flow without complications both sides have to be happy. Keegan, Richard J., et al. "A Qualitative Investigation Of The Motivational Climate In Elite Sport." Psychology Of Sport & Exercise 15.1 (2014): 97-107. Academic Search Complete. Web. 30 Mar. 2014. The article A Qualitative Investigation of The Motivational Climate in Elite Sport is a study that focuses an athletes motivational climate. A motivational climate is the motivational influence exerted by key social agents.(98) These social agents include coaches, parents, and peers. The study was conducted through interviewing twenty eight elite athletes and studying their responses. The conclusion of the study was that all three social influences played a part in an athletes motivational climate, although the greatest contributor to an athletes motivational climate was their coach. After reading through this study and comparing it to my observations I agree with its findings. Although with that being said I think that the study would be more effective if they did more than just interviewing athletes. Interviews can only tell you so much. If this study would have added observational research such as studying athletes in their everyday lives it would enhance the results and provide a more concise understanding of the influences on the motivational climate. Through my observations I noted that all three social influence athletes in different ways but coaches have the greatest effect on a players motivation because they are the ones who can help make them better. This article will benefit my ethnography because it provides points that help strengthen my argument about the multi-dimensional relationship between coach and players. It also shows that the relationship between coaches and players depend on more than just the coach. Athletes bring different dimensions to the relationship as well. When talking about individual athletes a coach apart of the study stated that You can't coach everyone the same way, like you've got to

Burrow 4

look at what you've got and what kind of person your player is.(104) This quote shows that players take part in molding the multi-dimensional relationship between coaches and players by being unique individuals. No one person is the exact same, everyone will react differently depending on the situation. The author makes a point that how a coach gives a player feedback can also has an effect on the relationship. The author supports this claim by quoting an athlete that took part in the study, He can't just say to you in front of the team You're not doing very well I'd think he was a dick but if he pulled me to one side I'd find myself more motivated to improve that way.(105) This builds on my previous point that athletes add to the multidimensional aspects of the player-coach relationship by simply being human. Coaches cant treat two players the exact same because as humans they are unique. Stewart, Craig, and Lynn Owens. "Behavioral Characteristics Of 'Favorite' Coaches: Implications For Coach Education." Physical Educator 68.2 (2011): 90-97. Academic Search Complete. Web. 31 Mar. 2014. The article Behavioral Characteristics of Favorite Coaches: Implications for Coach Education studies coaches behaviors and attempts to find the top five behavior characteristics that coaches should keep with their players. The study involved four hundred athletes and former athletes and had them recall memories of their previous coaches. The study took place over six years and in the end the top five most important traits were social support which is characterized as a coach showing concern for the welfare of the individual athlete, providing a positive group atmosphere and providing warm personal relationships with players, training and instruction which is characterized by improving athletic performance through hard work, skills development, practice in techniques and tactics, and instructing and coordinating other athletic activities followed by Positive feedback, autocratic behavior and democratic behavior. After reading the article assessing both the authors and my own research I agree that their findings are positive traits for coaches to have but do not think that they are a must. In my observations coach Collins coaching traits did not always include social support, yet based on his record as a head coach and the way both past and present players feel about him he is an excellent coach. I feel that these traits may vary depending on the athletes that you ask and the area from which there from. Also in regards to Craig and Lynns research interviewing athletes is a very effective means of gaining their research but observing and comparing team performances while accounting coaches behavior may sway the results of the top five traits a coach should have with his players. This article is a good indication that the relationship between a coach and his players is one that is both multi-dimensional and constantly evolving. For coaches to be affective the coach must not only be technically and tactically sound, but engage in behaviors receptive to the athlete. To complicate this issue, a coaching behavior that is positive for one athlete may be an ineffective approach for another (94) coaches have different relationships with different players. As time goes on both players and coaches change and as they change the relationship evolves to counter act the change. if a coach adapts his or her behavior to comply with the athletes' preferred behavior, the athlete may be more readily inclined to repay the coach through an

Burrow 5

improved performance(95) this quote sticks out to me because with all relationships there is a certain degree of give and take and the coach-athlete relationship should be no different.