Perception of Coaching Behaviors, Coping, and Achievement in a Sport Competition

Research Note Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 2011, 33, 460-468 2011 Human Kinetics, Inc. Perception of Coaching Behaviors, Coping, and Achievement in a Sport Competition Michel Nicolas, 1 Patrick Gaudreau, 2 and Véronique Franche 2 1 Université de Bourgogne; 2 University of Ottawa This study examined the relationship between perceived coaching behaviors, coping strategies during a sport competition, and sport achievement. A prospective design was used in which 80 athletes from individual sports completed measures of perceived coaching behaviors two days before a competition (Time 1) and measures of coping and sport achievement within three hours after a sport competition (Time 2). As expected, results of multiple regressions indicated that supportive coaching was a positive predictor of task-oriented coping and sport achievement whereas unsupportive coaching was a positive predictor of disengagement-oriented coping. Both types of coping were significantly associated with sport achievement. Task-oriented coping was a significant partial mediator in the relation between supportive coaching and sport achievement. This study, which contributes to both the coaching and coping literatures, highlights the role of supportive coaching behaviors in the initiation of effective stress management during sport competitions. Keywords: performance, stress management, self-regulation, competition Coping with the stress of sport competition is recognized as a pivotal selfregulatory factor to promote optimal levels of sport achievement (e.g., Gaudreau, Nicholls, & Levy, 2010). Mounting research has also lent credence for the role of individual-related factors (e.g., personality, motivation, cognitive evaluation) as predictors of sport-related coping (for a review, see Nicholls, 2010). The goal of this study was to extend prior empirical research by examining the role of a ubiquitous socioenvironmental factor coaching behaviors in predicting the use of athletes coping and achievement during a sport competition. Several conceptual models of coping have been proposed in the sport literature. In this study, task-oriented coping represents the strategy used to directly manage the stressful situation (i.e., problem-focused) and its resulting cognitive and affective activation (i.e., approach emotion-focused). 1 Other labels such as approach (Nes & Segerstrom, 2006) and engagement coping (Connor-Smith, Compas, Wadsworth, Michel Nicolas is with the Faculty of Sport Sciences in Dijon, Université de Bourgogne, Dijon, France. Patrick Gaudreau and Véronique Franche are with the School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 460

Nicolas, Gaudreau, and Franche 461 Thomsen, & Saltzman, 2000) have been used to describe this broad dimension, which includes strategies such as effort expenditure, thought control, relaxation, logical analysis, mental imagery, and support seeking. In the past, indicators of taskoriented coping have been found to positively correlate with both objective (e.g., Bois, Sarrazin, Southon, & Boiche, 2009) and subjective (e.g., Amiot, Gaudreau, & Blanchard, 2004; Gaudreau et al., 2010) indicators of achievement. A second coping dimension, disengagement-oriented coping, represents the strategies that enable the person to withdraw from the process of striving for the fulfillment of desired outcomes. This dimension, which includes behavioral disengagement and venting of unpleasant emotions, has been negatively associated with objective (e.g., Gaudreau & Blondin, 2004) and subjective (e.g., Amiot et al., 2004) indicators of achievement. The relationship between coaching and coping remains largely unexplored. Yet, the importance of coaching to promote optimal functioning of athletes has been highlighted by several motivational, interpersonal, and leadership theories in sport and general psychology (for a review, see Jowett & Lavallee, 2007). Although these models target distinct yet complementary coaching behaviors, they focus mostly on the emotional/interpersonal components of coaching. Arguably, effective coaching requires not only the establishment of a satisfactory relationship, but also adequate physical, technical, mental, and tactical preparation of the athletes (e.g., Hollembeak & Amorose, 2005). In line with this reasoning, the Coaching Behavior Scale for Sport (Côté, Yardley, Hay, Sedgwick, & Baker, 1999) offers an interesting platform to cover a varied set of preparatory and relational coaching behaviors. In this study, the label supportive coaching was selected to describe a broad and multifaceted coaching style that incorporates distinct yet interrelated emotional/relational and structural/instrumental components of effective coaching. Supportive coaching can play a positive role by providing guidance in the goal striving process and nurturing the development of athletic and mental skills (Côté et al., 1999). In that sense, it can also be seen as a resource (Hobfoll, 2002) likely to make athletes more capable of solving the problems and allowing them to deal with the stress inherent to sport competitions (e.g., Ntoumanis, Biddle, & Haddock, 1999). Supportive coaching behaviors in the form of task-involving motivational climate (e.g., Ntoumanis et al., 1999) have been found to positively correlate with task-oriented coping (TOC) in the sport domain. Despite their potentially positive role, coaches can sometimes become a source of stress (e.g., Kristiansen & Roberts, 2010) a fact that has been recognized in several motivational, interpersonal, and leadership theories (for a review, see Jowett & Lavallee, 2007). In this study, negative personal rapport behaviors such as yelling, manipulating, threatening, intimidating, and upsetting the athletes were used to describe an unsupportive coaching style likely to be experienced as pressuring by athletes (Côté et al., 1999). Excessive pressure from the coaches, favoritism, and greater time spent with the best athletes are important risk factors for impaired self-regulation as evidenced by studies showing a positive association between ego-involving motivational climate (e.g., Kristiansen, Roberts, & Abrahamsen, 2008) and the use of disengagement-oriented coping (DOC) in the sport domain. Past research has linked coaching behaviors and coping, on the one hand, and coping and sport achievement, on the other hand. This study aimed at providing a novel empirical test of the entire sequence relating coaching behaviors, coping, and

462 Coaching, Coping, and Achievement sport achievement. Past research has also relied on cross-sectional research designs that preclude inferences about the direction of the relationship between coaching and coping. A first goal of this study was to examine the association between perceived coaching behaviors assessed before a competition and the athletes usage of coping strategies during a sport competition. This prospective design tried to contribute and advance the literature by offering a more direct test of whether athletes coping strategies and sport achievement are influenced by perceived coaching behaviors. A second goal was to propose and test a mediation model wherein coping mediates the prospective relationship between perceived coaching behaviors and athletes sport achievement. Consistent with the literature reviewed above, supportive coaching should increase sport achievement because it should correlate with athletes TOC during the competition, which in turn should positively correlate with their level of sport achievement. Unsupportive coaching was expected to positively correlate with athletes DOC, which in turn should negatively correlate with their level of sport achievement. Participants Method Eighty athletes from France (70% females) ranging from 15 and 33 years of age (M =18.46; SD = 2.71) participated in this study. Athletes were competing at the departmental/city (5%), regional (20%), national (58.8%), and international (16.2%) levels and their competitive experience ranged from 1 to 16 years (M = 7.73; SD= 4.06). Participants were training 7.89 hr weekly (SD = 4.98) in 1 of 11 individual sports (e.g., gymnastics, cycling, combat sports, track and field, racquet sports). They all provided informed consent, and the research was conducted in accordance with international ethical guidelines that are consistent with APA norms. Measures and Procedures Coaching Behavior Scale for Sport (Time 1). Two days before the competition, this 44-item questionnaire (Côté et al., 1999) was used to assess athletes perception of seven of their coach s behaviors (see Table 1 for sample items of each subscale). Participants responded to the stem how frequently do you experience each of the following coaching behaviors using a scale from 1 (never) to 7 (always). Exploratory factor analyses supported the factor validity of this questionnaire (Côté et al., 1999). In this study, the six positive coaching behaviors (i.e., a total of 36 items) were aggregated to form an index of supportive coaching (M = 4.80, SD = 0.90, α =.80) whereas the eight negative personal rapport items were averaged into an index of unsupportive coaching (M = 1.97, SD = 0.65, α =.67). 2 Coping Inventory for Competitive Sport (Time 2). The Time 2 package was administered within 3 hr after the competition. Eight subscales from the Coping Inventory for Competitive Sport (Gaudreau & Blondin, 2002) were completed by athletes who rated the extent to which each item represented their actions or thoughts during the competition on a scale from 1 (does not correspond at all) to 5 (corresponds very strongly). Consistent with previous research (e.g., Amiot et

Table 1 Item Samples of Questionnaires Training / Planning Technical skills provides me with structured training session provides me with feedback that helps me improve my technique Coaching Behaviors Mental preparation Goal setting provides advice on how to stay focused helps me identify strategies to achieve my goals Competition strategies prepares me to face a variety of situations in competition Positive personal rapport shows understanding for me as a person Negative personal rapport uses fear in his/ her coaching methods Thought control I replaced my negative thoughts by positive ones Mental imagery Relaxation I imagined that I was doing a good performance I relaxed my muscles Effort expenditure I gave a relentless effort Coping Strategies Logical analysis I analyzed the demands of the competition Seeking support I talked to someone who is able to motivate me Disengagement/ Resignation I lost all hope of attaining my goal Venting of unpleasant emotions I expressed my frustrations Sport Achievement Mastery Self-Referenced Normative I executed my movements correctly I did better than my usual performances I did better than most other athletes 463

464 Coaching, Coping, and Achievement al., 2004), the eight coping strategies were organized in two dimensions: (1) TOC (i.e., thought control, mental imagery, relaxation, logical analysis, seeking social support, effort expenditure) and (2) DOC (i.e., disengagement/resignation, venting of unpleasant emotions). Confirmatory factor analyses have supported the factorial validity and internal consistency of this measure (e.g., Gaudreau & Blondin, 2002). Task-oriented coping (M = 2.52, SD = 0.57, α =.71) and disengagement-oriented coping (M = 2.00, SD = 0.76, α =.85) were not significantly correlated (r =.01, p >.05). Attainment of Sport Achievement Goal Scale (Time 2). This 12-item questionnaire assesses three theoretically driven criteria used by athletes to evaluate their level of goal attainment or subjective sport achievement: mastery, self-referenced, and normative goal achievement (Gaudreau & Amiot, 2010). Participants evaluated the extent to which each item corresponded to their performance during the competition using a scale from 1 (not at all) to 7 (totally). Therefore, it can be taken as an indicator of subjective sport achievement that covers three criteria that athletes are generally using to evaluate their level of achievement in a competition. Results of confirmatory factor analyses revealed that the three subscales of the A-SAGS can be used to form a general index of goal attainment (Gaudreau & Antl, 2008). As with previous research (e.g., Amiot et al., 2004), the interscale correlations in this sample were moderately high (from.65 to.71). The three subscales were averaged to form a global index (M = 3.85, SD = 1.50, α =.87). Results As expected, perceived supportive coaching was significantly associated with athletes TOC (r =.49, pr =.40, p <.01) and sport achievement (r =.36, pr =.36, p <.01). Unsupportive coaching was substantially associated with DOC (r =.21, pr =.21, p <.06) but not significantly correlated with sport achievement (r =.10, pr =.10, p >.05). Task-oriented coping (r =.42, pr =.37, p <.01) and disengagementoriented coping (r =.33, pr =.33, p <.01) were both significantly associated with sport achievement. 3 Multiple regressions were preferred to structural equation modeling given the novelty of the hypotheses and the small sample. The regression model contained two mediators and the significance of their specific indirect effect was tested using bias-corrected bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals with 5000 samples derived from the SPSS macro of Preacher and Hayes (2008). All variables were standardized as with all parameters reported herein and in Figure 1. First, the total effect of Time 1 (T1) supportive coaching on Time 2 (T2) goal attainment was positive and significant. Time 1 supportive coaching was positively associated with T2 TOC, which in turn was significantly associated with higher levels of sport achievement. Task-oriented coping acted as a significant partial mediator in the relationship between T1 supportive coaching and T2 sport achievement because the relationship remained significant after controlling the mediator (direct β =.23, p <.05) with the mediator nonetheless explaining a significant portion of this relationship (indirect β =.17, BCa 95% CI.04 to.30, p <.05). Second, the total effect of T1 unsupportive coaching on T2 sport achievement was nonsignificant. Nonetheless, T1 unsupportive coaching behavior was positively associated with T2 DOC, which

Figure 1 Results of the multiple regressions. Numbers preceding and following dashes correspond to total effect and direct effect, respectively. *p <.05. 465

466 Coaching, Coping, and Achievement in turn was negatively associated with T2 sport achievement. The indirect effect of DOC was not tested because the total effect of T1 unsupportive coaching on T2 sport achievement was nonsignificant. Discussion Results of this short-term prospective study indicated that perceived supportive and unsupportive coaching behaviors were associated, respectively, with higher reliance on TOC and DOC during a sport competition. These results are consistent with foregoing research on motivational climate and coping (e.g., Kristiansen et al., 2008). Furthermore, they lent credence to our hypotheses that supportive coaching behaviors can act as a resource to initiate the use of TOC strategies during sport competition and the attainment of higher levels of sport achievement. This study also contributed to the coaching and coping literatures by showing that TOC is a significant process by which perceived supportive coaching has a prospective influence on athletes sport achievement during a specific competition. Moreover, the positive association between unsupportive coaching behaviors and DOC supported our hypotheses that perceiving the coach as pressuring represents a risk factor for the use of more maladapted forms of coping. On a final note, TOC and DOC were associated, respectively, with increased and impaired levels of sport achievement a finding consistent with previous coping research (e.g., Gaudreau et al., 2010). Unsupportive coaching does not seem to constrain the likelihood of sport achievement. It should be noted, however, that sport achievement was only measured in the context of one specific sport competition. Longitudinal research is needed to examine whether the accumulated and repeated exposure to repressive forms of coaching can result in long-term deficits in skill acquisition and reaching one s optimal level of sport achievement. Unsupportive coaching behaviors are often expected and tolerated by athletes who are willing to relinquish the control to the coaches because of the inherent norms of the sporting environment (Chelladurai & Carron, 1983). However, not all athletes can tolerate autocratic or unsupportive coaching. Future research should examine whether the misfit between perceived and preferred coaching behaviors (Chelladurai, 2001) could exacerbate the potentially negative relationship between unsupportive coaching behaviors and sport achievement. This study was conducted with a small sample of athletes with widely varied characteristics. Despite the fact that correlations all remained significant after controlling for several of these characteristics (e.g., gender, age, experience level), replication of these results in more homogeneous samples is warranted. Furthermore, prior work has indicated that unsupportive coaching behaviors have stronger influence in teams compared with individual sports (Baker, Yardley, & Côté, 2003). This study was conducted exclusively with athletes from individual sports, which might explain the weak association between unsupportive coaching and DOC. Shared perceptions of unsupportive coaching among teammates might exacerbate an individual s propensity to ruminate about the behaviors of the coach and to use DOC. Research is needed to examine how within-team processes can alter the association between perceived coaching behaviors and athletes self-regulation in team settings.

Nicolas, Gaudreau, and Franche 467 This study contributed to a sparse literature revealing the importance of athletes proximal social environment on sport-related coping during competition. Coaching behaviors can be studied within the confines of various concepts such as leadership styles, autonomy support, motivational climate, and the dyadic coach athlete relationship (for a review, see Jowett & Lavallee, 2007). Future research should embrace a multidimensional approach to identify communalities and uniqueness (Cumming, Smith, & Smoll, 2006) that could help determine which coaching characteristics are more likely to promote athletes acquisition, development, and usage of effective coping strategies. Furthermore, future work should incorporate multiple subscales of unsupportive coaching behaviors to more fully assess the distinct behaviors characterizing this type of coaching (e.g., psychological control, conditional attention, punishment of mistakes, autocratic leadership). Applied research is also needed to examine whether preventive psycho-educational interventions that teach supportive coaching behaviors (Smith, Smoll, & Cumming, 2007) have ripple effects on athletes usage of coping strategies. Randomized field trials should also start evaluating the effectiveness of sport-related coping interventions to predict athletes optimal achievement and well-being in the sport domain and beyond. Notes 1. Fuller descriptions of this conceptual organization of coping can be found in articles previously published in this journal (e.g., Amiot et al., 2004; Gaudreau & Antl, 2008). 2. Results of confirmatory factor analyses are available upon request. 3. Partial correlations (pr) controlled for gender, age, level of expertise, year of training, and weekly hours of training. The covariates were not controlled for in the regression analyses. Acknowledgments The first two authors played equal roles in the preparation of this article and should both be considered as first authors. This study was supported by a grant from SSHRC Sport Canada Research Initiative to the second author and by a Research grant from the university of the first author. References Amiot, C.E., Gaudreau, P., & Blanchard, C.M. (2004). Self-determination, coping, and goal attainment in sport. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 26(3), 396 411. Baker, J., Yardley, J., & Côté, J. (2003). Coach behaviors and athlete satisfaction in team and individual sports. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 34(3), 226 239. Bois, J.E., Sarrazin, P., Southon, J., & Boiche, C.S. (2009). Psychological characteristics and their relation to performance in professional golfers. The Sport Psychologist, 23(2), 252 270. Chelladurai, P. (2001). Managing organization for sport and physical activity: A system perspective. Scottsdale, AZ: Holcomb-Hathaway. Chelladurai, P., & Carron, A.V. (1983). Athletic maturity and preferred leadership. Journal of Sport Psychology, 5(4), 371 380.

468 Coaching, Coping, and Achievement Connor-Smith, J.K., Compas, B.E., Wadsworth, M.E., Thomsen, A.H., & Saltzman, H. (2000). Responses to stress in adolescence: Measurement of coping and involuntary stress responses. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 976 992. Côté, J., Yardley, J., Hay, J., Sedgwick, W., & Baker, J. (1999). An exploratory examination of the coaching behavior scale for sport. Avante, 5(2), 82 92. Cumming, S.P., Smith, R.E., & Smoll, F.L. (2006). Athlete-perceived coaching behaviors: Relating two measurement traditions. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 28(2), 205 213. Gaudreau, P., & Amiot, C. E. (2010). Development of the Sport Achievement Goal Scale (SAGS). Manuscript submitted for publication. Gaudreau, P., & Antl, S. (2008). Athletes broad dimensions of dispositional perfectionism: Examining changes in life satisfaction and the mediating role of sport-related motivation and coping. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 30(3), 356 382. Gaudreau, P., & Blondin, J-P. (2002). Development of a questionnaire for the assessment of coping strategies employed by athletes in competitive sport settings. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 3, 1 34. Gaudreau, P., & Blondin, J-P. (2004). The differential associations of dispositional optimism and pessimism with coping, goal attainment, and emotional adjustment during a sport competition. International Journal of Stress Management, 11, 245 269. Gaudreau, P., Nicholls, A., & Levy, A.R. (2010). The ups and downs of coping and sport achievement: An episodic process analysis of within-person associations. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 32(3), 298 311. Hobfoll, S.E. (2002). Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology, 6, 307 324. Hollembeak, J., & Amorose, A.J. (2005). Perceived coaching behaviors and college athletes intrinsic motivation: A test of Self-Determination Theory. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 17, 20 36. Jowett, S., & Lavallee, D. (Eds.). (2007). Social psychology in sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Kristiansen, E., & Roberts, G.C. (2010). Young elite athletes and social support: Coping with competitive and organizational stress in Olympic competition. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 20, 686 695. Kristiansen, E., Roberts, G.C., & Abrahamsen, F.E. (2008). Achievement involvement and stress coping in elite wrestling. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 18, 526 538. Nes, L.S., & Segerstrom, S.C. (2006). Dispositional optimism and coping: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 235 251. Nicholls, A. (2010). Coping in sport: Concepts, theories, and related constructs. New York: Nova Science. Ntoumanis, N., Biddle, S.J.H., & Haddock, G. (1999). The mediating role of coping strategies on the relationship between achievement motivation and affect in sport. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 12, 299 327. Preacher, K.J., & Hayes, A.F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879 891. Smith, R.E., Smoll, F.L., & Cumming, S.P. (2007). Effects of a motivational climate intervention for coaches on young athletes sport performance anxiety. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 29, 39 59. Manuscript submitted: July 7, 2010 Revision accepted: January 21, 2011