1. Exploration of the Impact of Coaching Behaviors on Female Collegiate Athletes:
A Study of Self-confidence, Mental Errors and Performance
A Synthesis of the Research Literature
A Synthesis Project
Presented to the
Department of Kinesiology, Sport Studies, and Physical Education
The College at Brockport
State University of New York
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Science in Education
(Athletic Administration)
By
Tiye Q. Davis
December 14, 2016

2. THE COLLEGE AT BROCKPORT
STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
BROCKPORT, NEW YORK
Department of Kinesiology, Sport Studies, and Physical Education
Title of Synthesis Project:
Exploration of the Impact of Coaching Behaviors on Female Collegiate Athletes:
A study of Performance, Self-Confidence and Mental Errors
A Synthesis of the Research Literature
Read and Approved by:
Date: December 14, 2016
Accepted by the Department of Kinesiology, Sport Studies, and Physical Education, The College
at Brockport, State University of New York, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree Master of Science in Education (Physical Education).
Date: _________________ ________________________________
Dr. Cathy Houston-Wilson
Chairperson, Department of Kinesiology,
Sport Studies, and Physical Education
2

3. Table of Contents
Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………4
Chapter 1…………………………………………………………………………………………..5
Chapter 2…………………………………………………………………………………………10
Chapter 3…………………………………………………………………………………………14
Chapter 4…………………………………………………………………………………………35
Chapter 5…………………………………………………………………………………………46
References………………………………………………………………………………………..48
Appendix A – Synthesis Article Grid……………………………………………………………50
3

4. Abstract
This synthesis explores the impact of coaching behaviors on female collegiate athletes.
Specifically, it examines self-confidence and mental errors in relation to performance. Thirteen
articles, which included a total of 1,917 participants, of which 695 were female collegiate
athletes, were reviewed and synthesized to answer six research questions, to identify a gap in the
literature. While both mental errors and self-confidence levels are influenced by coaching
behaviors, there is little evidence to prove a relationship exists between self-confidence and
mental errors. The dimensions of an interdependent relationship are represented as variables of
the “Triangle of Effects”; they are examined through previously employed tools such as the
Coaching Behavior Questionnaire, the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory, the Coach-Athlete
Questionnaire, the Sport Motivation Scale, and two qualitative measures: interviewing and
journaling. This research concludes that there is a need for further examination of the
relationship between coaching behaviors, self-confidence and mental errors, in order to enhance
the coach-athlete relationship and increase self-confidence, which will ultimately reduce mental
errors in athletes.
Keywords & key phrases used in search:
self-confidence, coaching behaviors, mental errors, sport anxiety, performance, collegiate
athletes, female collegiate athletes
4

5. Chapter 1
Introduction
It is well understood that the interactions between coaches and their athletes have a
significant bearing on the coach-athlete relationship. What may be more interesting is the
influence coaching-behaviors have on an athletes’ perceptions of effective coaching. More
specifically, what impact do the perceived effective or ineffective, coaching behaviors have on
an athletes’ self-confidence, mental errors and performance?
Coaching behaviors can be defined as actions and/or exhibitions of behaviors that may
have a negative or positive influence on athletes by the coach (Kenow & Williams, 1992). Self-
confidence affects the way one feels, thinks and behaves while mental errors are thoughts that
occur during competition, usually negative, which lead to physical errors, essentially the error is
mental. Manifestations of anxiety have been shown to have negative effects on performance, as
well as interrupt the perception of the relationship between an athlete and a coach (Baker, Cotê
& Hawes, 2000). Negative behaviors can be perceived as physical or verbal exhibitions i.e.,
throwing chairs during contests, or breaking a clip board, or swearing directly at a player. An
extreme example of verbal aggressiveness or abuse was found in Ruggerio & Lattin (2008)
where a coach intentionally diminished a female collegiate athletes’ worth as an individual by
saying “You need brain surgery. You are so stupid, dumb and nothing but a little shit”. On the
other hand, positive coaching behaviors may be perceived as a high five when a player is subbed
out or verbally making a positive statement to an individual in front of the team, such as “Your
quick thinking led to a great play, Maria”. Coaches’ attempts to exhibit positive behaviors gives
a coach the opportunity to create positive learning environments for their athletes, thereby
5

6. maximizing opportunities for improved self-confidence and decreasing instances of anxiety
induced errors.
Gaps in literature show there is a need for more thorough examination of the coach-
athlete relationship and its influencing variables, whether they are positive or negative. Previous
research raises questions regarding whether there is a relationship between coaching behaviors
and athlete self-confidence and mental errors during competition.
While few studies have researched the effect of self-confidence and mental errors, there
is reason to believe that coaching behaviors have an effect on mental errors as well as an effect
on self-confidence levels, therefore the three are related and perhaps interdependent. While both
mental errors and self-confidence levels are influenced by coaching behaviors, there has been
little evidence to prove there is a relationship between self-confidence and mental errors.
This idea can be conceptualized as the workings of a triangle, in this synthesis referred to
as the “Triangle of Effects”. One focal point would be the coach’s behaviors and the other two
focal points would be self-confidence and mental errors. As studied by Kenow and Williams
(1992), in their analysis of the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire, coaches felt their emotional
outbursts during competition helped the team, whereas the team stated that those outbursts did
not serve as motivation, but as criticism and judgment, and consequently, these feelings led to
committing errors in performance. Thus, this information indicates that the “Triangle of Effects”
would not only be in need of validation, but can be used to assess performance errors. If the
Triangle of Effects represents a valid interdependence, would fewer errors would be committed
during competition? And would positive development of self-confidence occur as a result of the
coach’s positive behavior or influence toward his/her players?
6

7. The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between coaching behaviors, self-
confidence, and mental errors in relation to performance. Investigating the perceptions of athletes
regarding positive and negative coaching behaviors, identifying how coaches build self-
confidence in athletes and how self-confidence is related to mental errors in performance may
help athletes understand their needs and may help coaches behave in a manner that is conducive
to increasing athlete self-confidence. Studies on the interpersonal relationships between coaches
and female athletes are minimal, however, despite the fact that the number of women in
intercollegiate sports has risen since the implementation of Title IX (Ruggerio & Lattin, 2008).
Thus, showing the need for more research that directly targets the female athletic population.
Research Questions
1) What is the impact of coaching behavior on the performance of female collegiate
athletes?
2) Which coaching behaviors are perceived to be positive by female collegiate athletes?
3) Which coaching behaviors are perceived to be negative by female collegiate athletes?
4) What impact does coaching behavior have on the self-confidence of female collegiate
athletes?
5) What impact does self-confidence have on athletes’ mental errors?
6) What is the relationship between mental errors and performance?
Operational Definitions:
Coaching Behaviors – actions and/or exhibitions of behaviors that may have a negative or
positive influence on athletes by the coach (Kenow & Williams, 1992)
7

8. Self-confidence – the way one feels, thinks and behaves, which has an important influence upon
sport performance (Kingston, Lane & Thomas, 2010)
Sport Anxiety – explanation of the two different manifestations of anxiety on athletes, trait and
state anxiety (Baker, Cotê & Hawes, 2000)
Cognitive(State) Anxiety – refers to feelings of worry or apprehension
Trait Anxiety – a predisposition to perceive situations as potentially threatening and
respond with manifestations of state anxiety - *sometimes referred to as competitive trait
anxiety
Mental Errors – mistakes that occur during competition that are representative of
cognitive/attentional disruptions (Bird & Horn, 1990)
Triangle of Effects:
Assumptions:
1) It is assumed that not all participants in the studies were honest on surveys, in focus
groups and questionnaires.
Coaching
Behaviors
Mental
Errors/PerformanceSelf Confidence
8

9. 2) It is assumed that all researchers involved in these studies upheld their duties to analyze
results without bias and confidentiality.
3) It is assumed that all transcriptions, analysis and coding were accurately recorded.
4) It is assumed that the literature was exhausted.
Delimitations:
1) All articles used have been peer reviewed.
2) All articles with the exception of three are from the year 2000 and beyond. Background
information dated as early as 1992, appears in chapter 1 only, not in the critical mass of
articles.
3) Subjects in the articles selected include females in collegiate sport.
Limitations:
1) Many of the studies list male and/or female participants, but do not share which groups
specifically yield which results, and/or the results are from mixed categories, thus making
it difficult to narrow down some studies to female athletes only.
2) Only one study explores in depth the relationship between coaching behaviors, self-
confidence and mental errors.
3) Much of the language is inconsistent, where many studies use the terms trait and state
anxiety, and others use cognitive and somatic anxiety.
9

10. Chapter 2
Methods
The purpose of this chapter is to discuss how the research studies were collected to
examine the relationship between coaching behaviors, self-confidence and mental errors.
Data Collection
The search to narrow the selection of the critical mass of articles began by utilizing the
SPORTDiscus database, at the State University of New York, The College at Brockport Library.
Key terms used in the initial search were combinations of “self-confidence”, “coaching
behaviors”, and “mental errors”. All searches were criteria filtered for peer review and full text.
The first result list in the search of “coaching behaviors” and “self-confidence” yielded
nine articles which included articles that are commonly referenced in current research, but
published in 1990, 1992 and 1999. It was then determined that, in order to better explain the
topic of the relationship between coaching behaviors and self-confidence, these articles could be
utilized in the introduction and discussion.
As terms were searched in a broad manner, they were interchanged, “Mental errors”,
which was yielding low findings, was replaced with “collegiate athletes” from the SportDiscus
Database via the EBSCOhost search engine. The result of “coaching behaviors” and “collegiate
athletes” yielded four articles, only one of which was viable to the study. The result of “coaching
behaviors” and “athlete self-confidence” yielded eight articles, where one was considered
appropriate for use, due to its nature of having studied the self-confidence impact of coaching
behaviors.
10

11. Upon reviewing the initial articles found, additional key terms became apparent in the
form of commonly referenced themes or notations from the literature. These themes included
“sport anxiety”, and “sport performance”. These terms yielded 17 and 78 articles respectively
and of these, 4 were considered for the critical mass. During the summarizing process for the
article grid, only two of the four were deemed viable for the study, as they provided research on
relationships between sport anxiety and coaching behaviors, and mental errors.
With the understanding that there was not yet enough supporting literature for use, the
PsycINFO Database was employed and the data search began with the same key terms. The
initial result list consisted of 95 articles, from a variety of academic journals. Of these articles,
key words in titles then narrowed it down to thirty that would be of possible use, and after
reviewing abstracts, only five would be considered appropriate for the critical mass due to their
contributions.
The search term “female collegiate athletes” in conjunction with “mental errors”,
“performance errors”, “sport anxiety”, “coaching behaviors” and “self-confidence”, yielded the
same articles that were already found. Therefore, the search term was not a productive agent for
the search. Many articles were deemed unfit for this synthesis, due to a lack of clarity in
participant ratios of males to females in the findings, or alternative interpretations in the
discussions.
Finally, key terms were entered into Google Scholar, where finding peer reviewed
research was somewhat more difficult, but achievable. This search yielded many studies, some
that were already collected, but allowed for elaboration on the topic. The most useful tools for
data collection were analyzing reference pages for commonly cited or applicable research, as
well as Drake Memorial Library employees, who helped navigate advanced searches, and terms
11

12. to gather information. Overall a total of 21 articles were collected for review, which were then
summarized into the Synthesis Article Grid (Appendix A). During the summarization ten,
articles proved to be unfit for this synthesis, as they did not answer any of the research questions,
and did not fit into the emerging themes.
The result list includes research from a variety of journals including, International
Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, The Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, The Journal of
Behavioral Sciences in Sport, The Journal of Sport Behavior, The Sport Psychologist, Journal of
Sport & Exercise Phycology, The Howard Journal of Communications, The International
Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, and The Journal of Psychology of Sport & Exercise.
Data Coding
Of the articles selected 10 were included in the critical mass, and three were designated
for supplemental background information, used only in the introduction as well as discussion
sections. Many of the articles found for the critical mass used mixed methods of data collection.
In some studies, questionnaires were administered to the participants to evaluate certain
variables, and then subjects were observed by the researcher(s). Some of the research also
included interviews and conversations with participants about their sport experiences. The total
number of participants across all articles was 1,917. Of this sample: 695 were female collegiate
athletes, 795 were male (and have been excluded from this synthesis), 86 were unspecified as
male or female, 179 were coaches. Participants of studies that evaluated both collegiate and high
school athletes, included 444, males and females.
Analysis of these articles began by utilizing the synthesis grid as a tool for identifying
key or common words and phrases. Once each article was summarized in the areas of: purpose,
12

13. methods, participants, analysis, findings and discussion and future research, emerging themes
across articles were evident. Breakdown of themes was based on purpose, positive or negatively
perceived coaching behaviors, the impact of coaching behaviors, sport anxiety, errors or
mistakes in competition, and high or low levels of self-confidence. From these categories,
similarities were evident where sport anxiety manifested in both trait and state anxiety. Self-
confidence was commonly found to be measured via questionnaire, differences in coach self-
perception of coaching behaviors and the impact of coaching behaviors provided a need for two
separate categories. Based on the information in the articles, a response to the research questions
was formulated.
13

14. Chapter 3
Review of Literature
The purpose of this chapter is to examine the existing literature regarding coaching
behaviors, self-confidence, and mental and performance errors. For purposes of this synthesis a
total of thirteen peer-reviewed articles were used. Of these, 10 ranged between the years of 2000
to 2013 and three were dated, 1990, 1992, and 1999. The information that applies to the
relationship between coaching behaviors, self-confidence, and mental and performance errors
was categorized into five groups: perceptions and impacts of coaching behaviors, positive
coaching behaviors, negative coaching behaviors with a sub-category of poor coaching, self-
confidence and mental errors, and relationships of the variables. These categories were created
based on the emergent themes in the literature, in connection with the research questions.
Perceptions and Impact of Coaching Behaviors
Researchers Horn, Bloom, Berglund and Packard (2011), conducted a study to describe
the relationship between collegiate athletes’ psychological characteristics and their preferences
for different types of coaching behaviors. With the guidance of R.E. Smith’s 1998 conceptual
model of sport anxiety, it was hypothesized that athletes who are high in competitive trait anxiety
may prefer coaches who are socially supportive, responding to athlete performances with
positive and encouraging responses, rather than critical or punishment-oriented feedback. The
sample of participants in this study included 195 NCAA Division III athletes, both male and
female, ranging from ages 18 to 26 who played a variety of intercollegiate sports.
The study consisted of a series of self-report questionnaires, which were constructed to
specifically measure the following variables of interest: preferred coaching behaviors,
14

15. motivational orientation, and competitive trait anxiety. To measure preferred coaching behaviors,
researchers used the Leadership Scale for Sports which aimed to explore five dimensions of
leader behavior. Parts of this scale consisted of democratic and autocratic decision making styles,
training and instructional behavior, social support, and positive feedback. Motivational
orientation was measured using the Sport Motivation Scale, which had been employed to
operationalize motivation in the sport context in regards to athletes’ perceived reasons for
participation. The scale is comprised of 28 items in which the participants responded on a seven-
point Likert scale. The seven stages of motivation addressed were: intrinsic motivation to know
things, intrinsic motivation to accomplish things, intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation,
identified regulation, introjected regulation, external regulation, and amotiviation. Competitive
trait anxiety was measured by the Sport Anxiety Scale, developed by R.E. Smith in 1990 as a
multidimensional measure. It is comprised of 21 items on a four-point Likert scale that is divided
into three subscales: one form of somatic anxiety (body responses), and two forms of cognitive
anxiety (worry, and concentration and disruption).
The self-report questionnaires were administered before and after a sport session. A
member of the research team provided both oral and written explanations of the research project
and data were collected anonymously. Descriptive statistics were used to strengthen the
relationship between the variables and each data set. According to this model, an athlete’s
preferred coaching behavior will vary as a function of their personal characteristics and factors in
the sport context. Consistent with the study hypothesis, the multivariate results revealed that
athletes’ scores on the sport anxiety subscales were positively linked to: preference for training
and instruction, a democratic leadership style, social support, & positive and informational-based
feedback. The study concludes that there is a stress on the importance of the coach-athlete
15

16. relationship. It is a formidable task to create an environment that suits each athlete, only if the
coach is open and transparent with their intentions, while understanding the needs of their
players.
Expanding research regarding athletes’ perceptions of coaching behaviors, Kenow and
Williams (1999) studied relationship variables, focusing on coach-athlete compatibility. The
purpose of this study, was to determine if coach-athlete compatibility was significantly related to
athlete perception and evaluation of coaching behaviors; whether compatibility mediates
relationships of anxiety and self-confidence, and whether compatibility, trait anxiety, state
anxiety, and/or self-confidence can significantly predict athlete perception of coaching behavior.
Participants in this study included 68 female collegiate basketball players from non-scholarship
programs, all with at least one full season of playing experience with their coach. Participation
was voluntary, with permission and consent from coaches and athletes.
Instrumentation used in this study was the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire (CBQ), the
Sport Competition Anxiety Test (SCAT) and the Competitive Trait Anxiety Inventory – 2
(CSAI-2). Participants were also asked to rate their compatibility on a scale from 1-9 (nine being
the highest). Each participant completed the questionnaires with coaches absent from the area,
and placed them into envelopes, signing the seal to ensure confidentiality. A correlational
analysis was used to assess the relationship between athlete trait anxiety, state cognitive and
somatic anxiety, state self-confidence, compatibility and total factor scores for the CBQ.
Researchers found that athletes who were high in cognitive anxiety/self-confidence rated
the coach’s behavior negatively. In particular, high trait anxious athletes evaluated the coach’s
communication behaviors as negative. Athletes who were highly compatible with their coach
16

17. evaluated each coaching behavior factor more favorably than athletes who were less compatible
with their coach. The overall outcomes concluded there were more negative ratings in coaching
behaviors than positive.
Researchers concluded with the notion that if the athletes’ goals, personality, and beliefs
are consistent with those of their coach, the interaction of the individuals will likely be
satisfactory to both parties producing a positive interpersonal atmosphere. Factors in a
relationship as such could lead to a loss of self-confidence for the athlete, which may then impact
the athlete’s perception and recollection of coaching behaviors. Future research may benefit from
a practical standpoint, for coaches to develop good rapport and demonstrate support for their
athletes as this should improve the coach-athlete interaction, regardless of the casual direction of
self-confidence and compatibility. It is suggested that coaches make conscious efforts to improve
interpersonal relationships with their players, as well as to learn how to identify signals of high
cognitive anxiety in their athletes.
A 2013 study conducted by Lee, Mangusen, and Cho, sought to examine the effects of
gender on the influence of athletes’ perceptions of positive and negative strength and
conditioning coach behaviors on strength coach-athlete compatibility. Athletes’ perceptions of
their compatibilities with their coaches are undoubtedly linked to the coaching behaviors they
experience. In the same ways that a team head coach’s behavior has an effect on the
development and experience of an athlete, the strength coach’s impact is just as important to
player confidence and development. This study utilized a sample of 502 NCAA Division I
athletes; after excluding 31 through a screening process, 471 was the final subject pool (N=270
17

18. males and N=201 females). Varying in age and race, participants were members of softball,
volleyball, and football teams.
Instrumentation used was to measure supportive/emotional composure from the Coaching
Behavior Questionnaire to assess strength coaches’ negative and positive behaviors.
Additionally, an assessment included compatibility ratings, in which player goals, personality,
and beliefs are perceived to be a match of their coaches’. These were self-rated on a scale of one
to nine (one being low and nine being high). A MANOVA was conducted to check for potential
manipulation biases and omission of underlying relationships. Following the statistical nature of
the study, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed to examine the psychometric properties
of the CBQ and Coach-Athlete Questionnaire. Categories of negative action behaviors in student
athletes found in the analysis were: nervousness, discomfort, and worry.
The results of the study showed that the strength coaches’ behaviors of
supportiveness/emotional composure and negative activation were not perceived in a different
structure across gender. Still, while strength coach positive and negative behaviors were
consistent, more variance in compatibility was explained by their supportiveness/emotional
composure in the female sample than in the male sample. This means that the two-factor CBQ
was supported and provided evidence for a moderation effect of gender based on superior
psychometric properties.
In regard to research on coaching behaviors, the same level of attention has not been
observed for strength and conditioning coaches, despite the fact that their leader characteristics
and coaching behaviors can have a significant impact on the development of healthy and
productive strength coach-athlete relationships. Future research suggests that this study should be
sport specialized across athletics to reveal what types of coaching behaviors impact student
18

19. athletes by sport. Also, in this study the application of the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire to
strength coaches was validated and strength coach-athlete compatibility was further clarified.
A study conducted by Siekanska in 2013, focused on determining whether an athlete
perceived any differences in coaching behaviors depending on whether their coach worked with
a high-expectancy athlete more than they worked with low-expectancy athletes. A secondary
purpose was to acquire an answer to the question of what coaching behaviors athletes perceived
as enhancing or inhibiting to their sport development. Another purpose of the study was to
observe the types of relationships that existed between coaches and athletes. This study included
80 athletes (N=44 males and N=36 females), who represented both individual and team sports.
Seventeen participants were identified as international athletes and were placed into the high
expectancy performance group, and the remaining 67 nationally recognized athletes were placed
into the low performance group.
In a mixed methods examination, participants were asked to complete the Coaches’
Behaviors Survey, then complete an exploratory question survey, such as a guided journaling of
experiences. Section 1 of the questionnaire aimed to examine the degree to which the coach-
athlete interaction affected their achievement and sport development. Section 2 addressed the
participants’ opinions about the coach’s behavior toward the athletes with different sport skills.
This was also used to enumerate behaviors in favor of the athletes’ development and behaviors
that hindered it. The statistical analysis was done using the Statistica 8.0 software. This
calculated basic quantitative data to analyze variables and percentage values in the results.
Qualitatively, the open-ended responses of the survey were categorized by research
professionals. Four themes emerged from this process: 1) results of the quantitative survey, 2)
19

20. gender differences, 3) dependent variables and sport level, and 4) exploratory responses that had
not been thought of beforehand.
The results of the study revealed that female participants were ready to build a
relationship, and spend time with other members of their team and paid more attention to
coaching behaviors when they were in the lower expectancy group. Researchers also found that
coaching behavior towards more skilled athletes did not result in their enhanced sport growth,
instead it was perceived as a hindrance. It was observed by the lower expectancy group as
favoritism and a lack of instruction towards others from the coach. Additionally, athletes who
were in the low expectancy group recorded excessive criticism, but could not see the same in
their counterparts. Thus, the hypothesis of this study, those who are in the high-expectancy group
receive more recognition and positive reinforcement was supported.
One of the unique findings of this study suggests that high-expectancy athletes’ may
perceive the coaching behaviors, such as favoritism as inhibiting their athletic progress. Thus, to
promote a broad development of the athlete, coaches should adopt an interdisciplinary approach
which takes enhancing and inhibiting aspects of athletic development into consideration.
Coaches should not separate athletes into obvious groups of high and low-expectancy, but rather
create drills and tasks that everyone can participate in, which will enhance the sport development
of all involved. While it is a primary role of coaches to be cognizant of player development,
athletes can contribute to their experience and treatment by their coach by showing a
commitment to their craft, asking for feedback and constructive actions, and by putting in more
time to improve on their own.
20

21. In a 2005 study, Meyers, Vargas-Tonsing & Feltz examined coaching efficacy in
relationship to the variables of coaching behaviors and team variables. The primary purposes of
this investigation were to examine the influence of proposed sources of efficacy information on
dimensions of coaching efficacy for intercollegiate coaches and to determine the influence of
coaching efficacy on self-reported coaching behavior and team variables in men and women’s
intercollegiate teams. Participants included 135 head coaches, who took part in Time 1 of the
study, and 101 of the same head coaches participated in Time 2. In all a total of 1,618 athletes
also participated. Athletes varied across sports and ranged between the ages of 18-26. All
participants were members of NCAA Division II and III schools in the Midwest.
Data was collected twice for each participating team. First, a questionnaire containing the
Coaching Efficacy Scale was sent to head coaches. Then, a follow up phone call and electronic
email which resulted in a 75% response rate. In the second data collection, both coaches and
athletes were surveyed. Coaches completed questionnaires on the perceived frequency of their
efficacy-enhancing behaviors, while athletes provided their perceptions of the head coach. Head
coaches were asked to appoint someone not directly affiliated with the team to explain the study
as well as to administer the questionnaires. To determine the relationships between the sources
and dimensions of coaching efficacy collected at Time 1, product-moment correlations were
conducted. Thus, the influence of years as a collegiate coach, career-winning percentage, and
perception of team ability on dimensions of coaching efficacy did not differ for males or females.
Also, a multivariate multiple regression analysis was conducted to determine the predictive
strength of each of the proposed sources on dimensions of coaching efficacy.
The findings of this study varied for both the male and female participants. For males,
results supported previous research by demonstrating a relationship between the sources and
21

22. dimensions of coaching efficacy and the influence of Total Coaching Efficacy on self-reported
coaching behavior and team variables. For female participants, findings extended previous
research by identifying influences of specific dimensions of coaching efficacy for intercollegiate
coaches, a moderating role for coach’s gender on the influence of perceived social support, and a
moderating role for the coach’s gender on the influence of team satisfaction.
Responses from coaches showed that the perception of support from the athletes’ parents
predicted the Character Building Efficacy, Technique Efficacy, and Motivational Efficacy in
leadership which combined is the factor of Total Coaching Efficacy (TCE). Results from
women’s teams showed that the TCE predicted that only coaches reported efficacy-enhancing
behaviors with athletes. However, the relationship between TCE and coaching behaviors was
only significant for female coaches. Also from the results of women’s teams, the TCE did not
predict team satisfaction. Another finding from both men’s and women’s teams was only when
the sex of the male head coach matched the sex of the players did the learning and performance
of the athletes predict coaching behaviors, bringing forth the suggestion that administrators may
want to consider this before making a new hire or implementing a coaching-behavioral
intervention. Additionally, only Motivational Efficacy was positively influenced, because the
possibility of athletes’ gender bias, the moderation of coach’s gender may not fully explain a
relationship between a coach’s belief and team satisfaction, indicating that gender bias is not
solely an indication of team discomfort.
Positive Coaching Behaviors
In a 2009 study by Becker, gaps in the literature on coaching behaviors were described in
the rationale. The first gap noted was that previous research questionnaires were used to evaluate
22

23. perceptions of coaching behaviors, not athlete feelings. The second gap was that the exclusive
study of coaching behaviors does not allow the weight of other factors, such as coaching
philosophy, athlete experience, and team environment in the evaluations, in order to determine
coaching greatness. Research on coaching behaviors often provides valuable information
regarding leadership styles, feedback patterns and expectancy effects, but it does not provide
insights to the athlete’s experiences of being coached. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to
examine gaps in the literature and explore athlete experiences of great coaching. A total of 18
athletes (N=9 females and N=9 males) who played a variety of sports at the NCAA Division I
level participated in the study.
Phenomenological research methods were implemented to capture athlete experiences of
great coaching. The interview was a primary method of data collection, and fourteen personal
interviews and four phone interviews were conducted, each lasting more than two hours. All
interviews were transcribed verbatim, and then shared with the participant for clarifications and
comments. Then transcriptions were categorized in search of common themes.
Major findings that were discovered by Becker included the following categories: Coach
Attributes, Environment, The System, Relationships, Coaching Actions and Influences.
Participants in the study described background dimensions to their athletic careers to be stable
throughout their experiences, meaning that what they experienced was considered to be normal.
Coaches who were mentioned by participants were consistent with who they were and how they
maintained relationships, managed the team environment, and carried out their system. Thus,
there was no uncertainty, and the athletes knew exactly what to expect from their coaches.
Ultimately the participants were able to evaluate their collegiate coaching experiences as long
23

24. lasting, extraordinary impressions. The results revealed a more comprehensive picture of factors
that underlie coaching greatness.
Negative Coaching Behaviors
A study of the relationship between anxiety, self-confidence, and evaluation of coaching
behaviors by Kenow and Williams in 1992, tested in a specific setting, Smith and Smoll’s
leadership behaviors in sport. They also examined whether or not athletes’ state anxiety, self-
confidence and perceptions of their coaches’ behavior should be added to the model. The
approach was conducted via two case studies; Study 1 took place four days prior to and four days
after a game, with questions being administered by an assistant coach and took place during the
last month of the competitive season. Study 2 took place 30 minutes prior to competition and
immediately after competition and also at the end of a regular competition season. Participants in
the study included 11 female college basketball players and their male head coach, from an
NCAA Division III team in the southwest. This same sample was also used in the second study.
In both cases, anxiety measures were made with use of the Cognitive State Anxiety Inventory – 2
(CSAI-2), assessing both cognitive and somatic anxiety, as well as the 28-item Coaching
Behavior Questionnaire.
In Study 1, the results of both the CSAI-2 and CBQ were examined to evaluate the
relationships between the factors of anxiety levels and coaching behaviors. During the analysis,
athlete responses to the questions indicated a good deal of discrepancy between the athletes’ and
coach’s perceptions of coaching behaviors. In many of the evaluated areas the coach scored his
behavior positively, while players scored their coach negatively. Considering this discrepancy, it
24

25. is suggested that future researchers contrast self-perceptions with an observation of actual
coaching behaviors.
In Study 2, it was hypothesized that the coach would not be able to accurately estimate
his players’ anxiety and self-confidence; although athletes were relatively accurate in predicting
their coach’s negative behaviors. All athletes completed the CSAI-2 twice, once to evaluate
themselves and the again to evaluate their coach’s perceptions of their anxiety. The coach
completed a CSAI-2 in relation to their own feelings of anxiety. From this part of the study,
athletes generalized anxiety and self-confidence responses were utilized in the statistics
examining the coach’s ability to measure his athletes’ CSAI-2 scores.
Primary results of study 1 included an observation that athletes who scored high in self-
confidence evaluated coaching behaviors positively while those who scored low evaluated
coaching behaviors negatively.
Results of Study 2 noted significant changes in opinion of emotional outbursts from the
coach. Authors also found, that players evaluated coaching outbursts as unhelpful, while coaches
saw their behavior to be motivational. Athletes’ evaluation of their coach, indicated that they
perceived his/her state to be more anxious and less confident than he/she actually was, which
was contrary to the hypothesis. On the other hand, another hypothesis that proved correct was
those who perceive their coach negatively, had higher levels of cognitive anxiety. Questionnaire
items that correlated with high anxiety were “my coach made me feel uptight” and “my coach’s
behavior during the game made me worry about my performance.” These statements suggest that
the coach’s behavior may contribute to the cognitive anxiety that athletes experience during
games.
25

26. This study advises future research to employ the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire to
better understand player insights to coaching behaviors. Researchers also suggest that future
research include observation of the coaches’ behaviors in order to determine if the relationships
among anxiety, self-confidence, and athletes’ perception and evaluation of coaching behaviors
are a result of athletes’ perceptions or actual coaching behaviors.
In a 2008 study by Ruggiero and Lattin, examined the nature of interpersonal
communication between female intercollegiate coaches and female athletes, who were of African
descent, through the lens of verbally aggressive communication. Prior to participation in the
study, each participant had previously played four years of high school basketball and had been a
current member of a collegiate women’s basketball team. A total of eight women from NCAA
Divisions I, II, and III institutions were included.
A qualitative descriptive design with a phenomenographic approach was utilized to
examine participants’ perceptions of the influences of verbally aggressive communication from
their coaches. Hegemonic patterns of racial inequality through the use of communication was
observed by open and semi-structured interviews, which made a distinction between first and
second-order perspectives. Data collection was done by one-on-one interviews during a three-
month period in late 2001. The semi-structured interviews began in a location of the participants’
choosing, with a casual conversation before the recorded interview. Each interview lasted
approximately 2-3 hours. Interview tapes were transcribed and then coded and categorized.
During the coding process, six categories were constructed from descriptions of how
participants perceived verbally aggressive communication from their female coaches: threat,
debt, negative esteem, assertive stimulation, activation of impersonal commitments and
26

27. activation of personal commitments. Many of the participants shared experiences of enduring
threatening verbally aggressive communication in the forms of punishment by loss of
scholarships or early morning and extra practices. Debt was used on participants as a form of
guilt, as if the athletes owed their coach something. The persuasion of negative feelings towards
oneself was found in all eight participants. One reported that self-doubt impacted her personally,
her talent and athletic abilities. Punishment activities typically involved the coach seeking
compliance in a negative manner, excessive running, or difficult drills for long periods of time.
Appealing to persons internalized commitments was true for three of the participants, and
appealing to a person’s commitment to others was found as a negative communication tool as
well.
The descriptive categories that emerged from this study supported the notion that verbally
aggressive communications were frequent and memorable aspects of the communication process
between female collegiate coaches and female athletes of African descent, and included
stereotyping and an increase in uncertainty among individuals. As it is observed that the primary
goal of a head coach, regardless of gender, is to win; the communicative methods chosen may
not be positive or constructive. Future research from this article suggests that positive
communication strategies should be examined by the head coach to prevent verbally aggressive
communication and behaviors.
Poor Coaching
In a qualitative study conducted by Gearity & Murray (2011) sought to examine the
effects of poor coaching by dissecting the lived experiences of athletes. The subjects were
chosen by a process of elimination in which the author solicited a variety of athletes who first
27

28. answered the question “In your own perception, have you ever been poorly coached.” If he or
she responded affirmingly, then they were asked to participate in the study. Here, the sample of
16 men and women, who were current and former athletes, were evaluated.
In a phenomenological approach participant experiences were shared through a series of
interviews, then transcribed by researchers and trained professionals. This process elicited five
main themes: poor teaching by the coach, uncaring, unfairness, inhibiting athlete’s mental skills
and athlete coping. As themes were further examined, the following sub-categories shaped the
results: distracting, engendering self-doubt, demotivating, dividing the team, focused
concentration and attention, cohesion, and stress and coping. By categorizing statements and
stories of experiences, researchers compared them to each other, and topics in relation to the
Social Cognitive Theory by Bandura (2010), and/or the Achievement Goal Theory (AGT) from
Ames (1992). Researchers employed the AGT more to the results of this study. The AGT is
based on the assumption that an athletes’ motivation is based on the meaning he or she creates
for attaining certain goals: two main orientations that athletes use to measure their competence
are task-goal orientation or ego-goal orientation.
Findings of the study were shown to support previous research, suggesting that a coach
created ego-goal climate is associated with athletes perceiving greater peer conflict, less social
support and positive feedback. They also experienced more punishment-based feedback and
higher anxiety and performance related worry. If this is true, the athlete experience is overall
negative and highly stressful.
Much research has called to diversify approaches to the coach-athlete relationship and
this study highlighted the strength of a phenomenological approach to understanding athlete’s
lived experiences. Future research consists of interventions and adaptations to coping skills such
28

29. as goal setting, positive self-talk, imagery, and relaxation training in settings where the coach-
athlete relationship is deemed negative – due the relationship between athlete anxiety levels and
poor coaching.
Self-confidence and Mental errors
The literature of Bird and Horn (1990), hypothesized that if mental errors that occur
during competition are representative of cognitive/attentional disruptions, then individuals who
exhibit more mental errors should have higher cognitive anxiety than those who demonstrate
fewer mental errors. In a comparison of settings, both practice and competition areas were
observed to evaluate the increase in anxiety that occurs as a result of the highly evaluative nature
of competition, to prove the relative nature of cognitive anxiety and mental errors. Participants in
this study included an initial subject pool of 202 female high school varsity softball players, aged
14-17. After the first round of questionnaires, the pool was narrowed down to 161 participants.
Those eliminated had received questionnaire scores of 5-6, in order to represent two extremes
sides of the results, scores of one to four and seven to ten were kept. Each participant had
permission from the school and their head coach to be included in the study.
Procedures applied to the study were the Cognitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2)
and the Mental Error Questionnaire (MEQ). Prior to competition participants were given the
CSAI-2 to evaluate different levels of competitive state anxiety; immediately after performance
they were given the MEQ to personally assess the amount of mental errors committed during a
competition. The MEQ results ranged from “much affected” (many mental errors) to “very little
affected” (few mental errors). While the CSAI-2 gave sight to cognitive and somatic anxiety
29

30. levels, individuals were then assessed by groups of High Mental Mistakes (1-4) and Low Mental
Mistakes (7-10) based on confidence levels.
The authors stated that the results support the prediction that elevations in cognitive
anxiety are directly related to mental errors that occur during sport performance. When
translating the findings into applications and selecting appropriate intervention techniques,
cognitively based strategies should provide the most effective avenues for reducing mental errors
in sport. There is a need to understand the intricacies of the anxiety process and effects of motor
output to better ensure progress in athletes, and to examine ways to lower anxiety in order to
reduce mental errors in athletes.
In a study done by Hays, Thomas, Maynard and Butt (2010), authors examined the
application of confidence profiling in the development of individualized applied psychological
skills intervention. The purpose of the study was to explore the effectiveness of confidence
profiling as the basis for confidence-enhancing interventions. With the guidance of Feltz & Lirgg
from 2001, they aimed to explain the positive relationship between high levels of confidence and
successful sporting performance. The sole participant of this study was one female elite swimmer
who had over eight years of competition experience, both national and international.
The study was conducted in three phases. Phase 1 consisted of gathering background
information and establishing participant needs. In phase 2, a cognitive behavioral intervention
included cognitive restructuring as well as setting personal affirmations. Phase 3 included an
intervention evaluation where confidence types were assessed. Each phase was conducted
consecutively. Murphy’s 8 Step Cognitive Behavior Model of 1992 was used to assess the
results. This model consists of consultation orientation, sport familiarization, evaluation and
30

31. assessment, goal identification, group intervention, individual intervention, outcome evaluation,
and reassessment of goals. Here, all steps of the model consider the athlete’s functioning in
multiple contexts, and emphasis is placed on viewing the athlete as a person and not a performer.
Results of the study found that the application of Murphy’s 8 Step Model was one of
significance. It can be used to measure confidence from the athlete’s perspective and provide a
basis of one’s own confidence needs. The benefit of confidence profiling for the athlete is that it
can be applied as a means to enhance sport confidence. The authors concluded that the process of
confidence profiling can be used for empowerment and confidence building. In future research,
the case study approach can be used as a means of intervention for coach’s behaviors and for
perceptions of coaching behaviors by allowing the athlete to examine impact of self-feedback.
Relationships of the Variables
In a study by Baker, Côte and Hawes (2000), the purpose was to correlate the relationship
between coaching behaviors and sport anxiety in athletes. The interpersonal relationships
between coaches and athletes was evaluated; a natural expectation of the study was that the
relationship would influence the cognitive appraisal of situations by athletes. The study intended
to explain that specific behaviors of coaches were expected to praise an athlete, making the
athlete feel useful and necessary to the program. This praise would reduce competition anxiety
because the athlete feels more prepared due to the coach’s behavior being appropriate. On the
opposing side, if a coach behaves in ways that an athlete feels are detrimental to his/her
performance, sport anxiety would be expected to rise. Participants in this study were 228
athletes, of which 105, or 46%, were females. Each participant had an average of eleven years of
participation in their sport since youth, and an average of 2.2 years with their current coach.
31

32. Multiple regression analyses were used to examine the relationships of seven coaching
behaviors (physical training and planning, mental preparation, goal setting, competition
strategies, technical skills, personal rapport, and negative personal rapport) and three forms of
sport anxiety (age, gender, and sport type). Results of the regression analyses clearly indicated
that certain coach behaviors are better predictors of sport anxiety than others. Previous research
had demonstrated that perceived coaching behaviors were not significant predictors of athlete
anxiety. The findings in this article can be attributed to the use of different scales in research
analyses.
The strongest relationship found in this study was between negative personal rapport
behaviors and anxiety levels in athletes. This is demonstrated when total anxiety, somatic
anxiety, concentration disruption, and worry were significant outcomes of negative personal
rapport. The results indicate that negative behaviors have an impact on performance and errors in
competition and had a significant bearing on the coach-athlete relationship in which both coach
and athlete need to have an understanding of athlete anxiety.
While there was no uncertainty and the athletes knew exactly what to expect from their
coaches, negative behaviors from the coach were shown to preempt high anxiety in players. The
practical applications of these results suggest that coaches should understand the impact that
their behaviors have on anxiety levels in athletes. Future research based on this study suggests
that these relationships (between coaching behaviors and anxiety levels) should be tested
specifically with one sport group and their coach.
32

33. In an extension of research on the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire, Williams et al.
(2003) sought to reexamine the factor structure of the questionnaire by administering it to a large
enough pool of diverse participants to conduct both an Explanatory Factor Analysis (EFA) and a
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). While there is little research on the topic, researchers
continued to refer to the classic works of Smoll, and previous Kenow research. These previous
works are more of an ignition to intervention types of research. The participants of this study
were 484 athletes (N=273 college and N=211 high school), with a mean age of 17, who played
basketball, softball, baseball, and volleyball. Participants had almost one full season or more of
playing experience under their current head coach.
Testing took place prior to a practice session in the last third of the season, and in most
cases there were no games within the testing dates. Quantitative instruments employed for data
collection were the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire (CBQ) which consisted of a 21-question
series set on a 4-point Likert scale, responses ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree,
with no neutral option. The CSAI-2 was administered to evaluate self-confidence. Also, a
Compatibility Questionnaire was included to see if the relationship between a coach and a player
showed a difference in the CBQ. The EFA was conducted via Statistical Package for Social
Sciences, which was followed by a CFA. Correlational analyses were used to assess the
relationship between the athletes’ evaluation of coaching behaviors on the two CBQ factors, and
the athletes self-reported competitive trait anxiety, cognitive and somatic anxiety, state self-
confidence, and coach athlete compatibility.
Findings across all sports demonstrated that athletes who reported higher trait anxiety and
lower self-confidence prior to competition were more likely to perceive their coaches’ behaviors
during competition as ones with a negative impact, as opposed to athletes who reported lower
33

34. amounts of trait anxiety and high self-confidence. If higher trait-anxious and cognitive and
somatic-anxious athletes interpreted coaching behaviors as threatening, then it is not surprising
that these athletes would evaluate the coaching behaviors as having caused them more worry,
distracted attention, elevated physiological arousal, and poorer performance compared to athletes
whose self-report indicated lower levels of anxiety. The preceding rationale also could explain
the similar negative evaluation of coaching behaviors by athletes who lacked or had lower self-
confidence.
Future research suggests that in addition to the need for a more thorough examination of
coach-athlete compatibility, researchers should consider examining other athlete and coach
individual difference variables that might influence coaching behaviors and athletes perceptions
and evaluative reactions to these behaviors. A related approach might be to enhance coach-
athlete interactions by testing the effectiveness of interventions designed to decrease athletes’
anxiety levels and to increase their self-confidence. The premise would be that such
modifications would lead to an improvement in athletes’ perceptions and evaluative reactions to
their coach’s behavior.
34

35. Chapter 4
Discussion and Conclusion
For this synthesis, a total of thirteen research articles were reviewed in order to gain a
better understanding of the impact of coaching behaviors in relation to mental errors and athlete
self-confidence, specifically for female collegiate athletes. The overall purpose of this synthesis
project was to seek answers to the following research questions:
1) What is the impact of coaching behavior on the performance of female collegiate
athletes?
2) Which coaching behaviors are perceived to be positive by female collegiate athletes?
3) Which coaching behaviors are perceived to be negative by female collegiate athletes?
4) What impact does coaching behavior have on the self-confidence of female collegiate
athletes?
5) What impact does self-confidence have on athletes’ mental errors?
6) What is the relationship between mental errors and performance?
The findings will be discussed in respect to the aforementioned questions.
What is the impact of coaching behavior on the performance of female collegiate athletes?
Based on the literature reviewed, it is clear that the effects of coaching behaviors on
female athletes needs additional observation, research, and intervention in all levels of sport,
perhaps especially at the collegiate level. As collegiate sports have changed since the
implementation of Title IX, both female and male collegiate athletes deal with a great deal of
35

36. pressure in their lifestyle. Athletes are expected to complete courses and receive high marks,
practice for more than 18 hours per week, compete in 2-3 games per week during the regular
season, travel, make contributions to their team cohesion, and take care of themselves. Needless
to say, collegiate athletes, especially those on athletic scholarships, are under a great deal of
pressure. Female athletes, who at surface level have been given the same experiences and
responsibilities as their male counter parts, perceive and interpret those experiences differently.
According to Becker (2009), coaches are responsible for developing athletes’ mental,
physical, technical, and tactical abilities. In the collegiate setting, it is expected that the coach
wants to win and teach the game, but they also want to foster a growth environment where their
athletes enter their program as girls but leave as young women upon graduation. The research of
Meyers et al. (2005), provides evidence that female collegiate athletes’ relationships and coach
predictors of efficacy-enhancing behaviors were found to be in agreement with Horn’s 2002
finding, that the gender of the coach and the gender of the team may exert indirect influences on
coaching behaviors. In sum, this supports the idea that women should be coaching women,
because the athletes perception of coaching behaviors, is genuine and relatable.
Coaching behaviors are the overall difference in an athletes’ experience on any given
team. Sometimes the wins matter, but a common denominator in many teams’ winning or losing
is the way the coach treats the players, which is what determines if the experience is worth
having and worth remembering. If an athlete listens to their coaches’ opinions, respects their
system, and feels of value to the team, they typically express feelings of contentment and
comfort with their coach. However, the observation is two-fold; if a coach expresses criticism in
a constructive manner, respects players’ differences in background, personality and ability, and
36

37. values each players’ contributions to the team, then they are likely to have players who show
contentment and satisfaction.
Becker’s (2009) research found that athletes who were content described background
dimensions of their coaches to be stable throughout their experience. These coaches were
consistent in who they were, how they maintained relationships, managed the team environment
and carried out their system. As a result, there was no psychological uncertainty; athletes knew
what to do and what to expect from their coaches. The notion that athletes are happy knowing
what to expect from their coach shows value in consistency. Players will often express
discomfort because their coach was known to ‘fly off the handle’ or ‘lose it.’
Horn et al. (2011) indicates that there are types of behaviors and/or leadership styles
exhibited by coaches that can either facilitate or undermine the psychosocial growth and
development of athletes. Lee et al. (2013) found evidence that positive coaching behaviors, such
as praise and encouragement, resulted in greater levels of athlete enjoyment in training and being
coached as opposed to negative coaching behaviors, such as yelling and frequent criticism. Thus,
coaches need to understand the impact of words, phrases, disparate treatment, etc. Horn et al.
(2011) also found that athletes who are high in competitive trait anxiety may prefer coaches who
are socially supportive, responding to athlete performance with positive and encouraging
responses, rather than critical or punishment-oriented feedback.
As many studies have examined athletes’ preferred coaching behaviors, researchers lack
the application of their findings to a team that may be dealing with inhibiting coaching behaviors
and stressful environments. This means that there are not enough studies that examine current
athletes’ experiences in relation to their coaching environments and performance. When
examining the impact of coaching behaviors; it can be said that where there is a need for
37

38. observation, there is a need for correction and improvement, and as we delve deeper into
coaching impacts, positive and negative. This is a need for further research and possible
education the coaching environment and process.
Which coaching behaviors are perceived to be positive by female collegiate athletes?
While much of the research on coaching behaviors is directed towards examining
negative or inhibiting behaviors, many authors have provided suggestions on interventions of
coaching behaviors and the examination and application of positive behaviors. Becker (2009)
concluded that coaches who exhibited positive behaviors were those that had the ability to
evaluate player personnel and applied an observable amount of experience, meaning that players
understood what their coach was doing and could rationalize why they were doing things in a
certain way.
Horn et al. (2011) indicates that positive behaviors from coaches are a result of their
leadership style. A democratic leadership style that allows players to have opportunities to
contribute to team decisions was appreciated by collegiate athletes. According to their findings,
female athletes respond better to coaches who provide them with opportunities to learn and
achieve based on clear communication and feedback. In environments where athletes perceive
coaching behaviors as non-motivating and inhibiting, it is apparent that the coach has become a
dictator or too controlling in practice and competition.
Additionally, Siekanska, Blecharz, and Wojtowicz (2013), concluded that in order to
promote the broad development of an athlete, coaches should conduct themselves so that each
player on the team feels as if they are an important and contributing member. During practices,
38

39. coaches who include and teach each player drills and skills are exhibiting behaviors that players
read as caring and non-preferential to any player who may be better or worse than another.
Coaches who show athletes their value to the team create an experience that athletes tend to
evaluate as a positive one.
Which coaching behaviors are perceived to be negative by female collegiate athletes?
In Ruggerio and Lattin’s study of the impact of coaching behaviors on female collegiate
athletes, specifically participants of African descent (2008), verbally aggressive forms of
communication were found to be the most prominent inhibitor in athlete performances. Some
scholars suggest that verbal aggression is simply one way of persuading someone to respond in a
specific manner. Although, different compliance-gaining strategies may be used to obtain the
ultimate goal of gratifying the person who is sending the message (i.e. the coach), in this study
researchers have taken into account the impact of negative and verbally aggressive
communication and suggest that the effects produce negative motivational results.
Examples of verbal aggression found in Ruggerio and Lattin’s 2008 study include threats
such as “You are replaceable” and “I’m going to break you” (p.113). Debt was also inflicted on
players – coaches would imply that an athlete owed them something for giving them an athletic
scholarship. In turn, the female athletes in the study expressed negative feelings about
themselves, doubting their talent and athletic abilities. In some cases, negative self-feelings were
interpreted as personal attacks by the coaches due to statements such as “You aren’t worth sh-t,”
“You’re a waste of talent,” and “You must need brain surgery, because you are so stupid” (p.
115).
39

40. Participants from this study also identified punishment as an inhibiting factor in their
collegiate experience. In many cases, coaches utilize punishing activities in an effort to seek
compliance from their players. Physical exercises such as laps, suicides, and elongated drills
were said to have a negative effect on producing motivation. Of the young women who
participated, four said they ran for every little mistake and two said they resented being punished
for their other teammates’ mistakes. The other two participants said that their coaches placed
unrealistic expectations on them, and it essentially weighed them down.
Gearity and Murray’s research in 2011 on athlete perceptions of the psychological effects
of poor coaching, concluded that a coach who creates ego-goal climate is associated with athletes
perceiving greater peer conflict, less social support and positive feedback, and higher anxiety and
performance-related worry. A. Bandura (2010), defines an ego-goal orientation as one’s need
and primary thought to break records and show others up, while the task-goal orientation is based
on one’s need for self-reference and reflection in order to master a task. Gearity and Murray
(2011), identified common instances in which the coach contributed to decreases in athletes’
self-perceptions of ability and worth when they enforced their ego-goal orientation onto their
task-goal oriented players.
Self-efficacy can be described as the belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute
the course of action required to produce given attainments (Myers, Vargas-Tonsing, and Feltz,
2005). Coaches should be concerned with the outcomes that occur as a result of low and negative
self-efficacy in their players and try not to contribute to those feelings. Contributions by the
coach’s behavior to negative self-perceptions can have an impact, whether they are physical,
verbal, or non-verbal. In an easily observable behavior to outsiders, coaches may throw a clip
40

41. board or flip a chair during a competition, they may also say hurtful things such as “Get out, I
want someone else” or “You’re so horrible.”
A non-verbal behavior often exhibited by coaches is changing a players’ position without
telling them, or not playing an athlete in competitions without telling them why they are not
playing. Such behaviors are not only negative but they also contribute to lower levels of self-
perception and internal interpretations of the coaches’ perception of player abilities. According
to Kenow & Williams (1992), coaches should be made aware of potentially damaging
consequences of their behaviors and be given guidelines in modifying non-verbal messages in
order to be more supportive and encouraging towards athletes, especially those with high levels
of anxiety.
What impact does coaching behavior have on the self-confidence of female collegiate
athletes?
Coaching behaviors are said to have a lasting impact on athletes’ self-confidence, thus
creating reasons to examine the impact of those behaviors on a deeper level than performance.
Performance is an outside evaluation of an athlete, but the inner evaluation is the measurement of
self-confidence. According to Williams et al. (2003), athletes who report higher levels of trait
anxiety and lower levels of self-confidence are more likely to perceive their coaches’ behaviors
as negative. Typically, these negative behaviors are exhibited during competition. Athletes who
report low levels of trait anxiety and high levels of self-confidence are more likely to be
unbothered by their coach’s behaviors; they either pay little attention to them or find them to be
motivating. Additionally, if collegiate athletes with lower amounts of self-confidence interpret
41

42. coaching behaviors as threatening, these athletes would evaluate their coaches’ behavior as
causing them more worry and distraction during competition.
The use of fear and intimidation was found to decrease levels of self-confidence in Baker,
Cotê, and Hawes (2000), study of the “Relationship Between Coaching Behaviors and Sport
Anxiety in Athletes.” This finding is significant and was repeated in multiple studies as
researchers have identified a link between the behaviors that coaches exhibit, the internalization
of verbal and non-verbal actions which diminish self-confidence, and the output post interaction
– which is the athletes’ performance.
A primary responsibility of coaches is to develop their athletes mentally, physically, and
athletically, but a disregard for the mental development of a player only leads to negative
experiences that hinder performance. The process of making the coach-athlete interaction well
balanced is unique based on the individuals involved. Many professional female athletes attribute
their success to experience and growth during their college years. According to Becker (2009),
female athletes valued their coaches more when they gave them the opportunity to talk one-on-
one and when coaches shared the purpose for things that they were doing on and off of the
court/fields. Another example of a self-confidence boosting environment found by Becker
(2009), was the ability for players to create a personal relationship with their coach. Thus, the
impact of the professional relationship between the coach and the athlete was less damaging to
self-confidence because the athlete knew that behaviors and suggestions were coming from a
place of genuine care for the individual player’s development.
42

43. What impact does self-confidence have on athletes’ mental errors?
The relationship between self-confidence and mental errors is one that has been seldom
examined, but research from Bird and Horn (1990), Williams et al. (2003), and Hays et al.
(2010), provides insight to how levels of self-confidence can determine how an athlete performs
in competition. Although there is a connection between errors and performance, this connection
will be discussed in the next section. Here, we will examine the ways in which self-confidence
and mental errors are linked; both measures are internal factors in athletes, therefore the
influence is psychological.
As concluded by Bird and Horn (1990), Kenow and Williams (1992), Kenow and
Williams (1999), Baker, Cotȇ and Hawes (2000), and Williams et al. (2003), athletes who had
higher levels of self-confidence also had lower levels of cognitive and state anxiety, resulting in
better performances and fewer errors during competition. The role of confidence profiling
examined by Hays, et al. (2010), provided a basis for confidence-enhancing strategies for better
athlete performance. Confidence profiling is the assessment of an athletes’ self-confidence in
relation to their sport setting. The sole female participant in this study highlighted that she
struggled to have confidence in herself, putting herself down before others could. She also rated
her confidence level as a three on a scale of 1-10. As a result of her low confidence she struggled
in competition. If an error was made, her tendency was to remain down instead of bouncing
back.
Due to the internal nature of mental errors, the impact they have on self-confidence can
only be self-measured and then communicated by the athlete. This implies that the relationship
can only be speculated by outsiders such as coaches, teammates, and parents. It is important to
understand that the relationship between mental errors and self-confidence is indeed directly
43

44. linked because when self-confidence is high, mental errors are low. This conclusion comes from
a gathering of information on the amounts of anxiety a player feels during competition; although
anxiety can be induced by outside factors, the internal interpretation of those factors is what
impacts self-confidence. Therefore, when self-confidence is low, mental errors in competition
become high.
What is the relationship between mental errors and performance?
As indicated above, performance is observed by others, and many times is expressed
statistically, mental errors can best be evaluated by a player themselves. Mental errors can be
referred to as mistakes; they are instances where the player knows what to do but makes an error
in execution, much like a turnover in the game of basketball. It is often observed that after an
error is committed a player may have difficulty bouncing back and cannot remain invested in the
game. Often times they become more focused on the mistake, or not making the mistake again.
The outside observation of performance is often inconsistent with player self-evaluations.
For example, in the game of basketball, a player continuously turns the ball over but has 23
points and 10 rebounds in that same game. This player may not be focused on having helped lead
their team to a victory, but more on how to commit fewer turnovers. Thus, the assumption that a
very good player makes a small number of mistakes maybe untrue. We only know truth to an
athletes’ mental errors when we ask them to reflect on them and then compare thoughts to
performance. Research by Hays et al. (2010), and Gearity and Murray (2011), have taken
qualitative approaches to the study of mental errors and have found reflection or journaling to be
the most revealing data collection method by far.
44

45. Chapter 5
Future Research
The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between coaching behaviors,
self-confidence, and mental errors in relation to performance. Investigating the perceptions of
athletes regarding positive and negative coaching behaviors by identifying how coaches build
self-confidence in athletes and how self-confidence is related to mental errors in performance
may help athletes understand their own needs and may help coaches behave in a manner that is
conducive to increasing athlete self-confidence.
Information presented in this synthesis indicates that the “Triangle of Effects” is not only
in need of validation, but may be utilized to enhance athlete performance and self-confidence via
coaching behaviors. The valid interdependence of the Triangle would suggest that the findings of
future research be applied to interrupt negative environments and make corrective suggestions to
coaches. A study that does this may be able to link the elevation of self-confidence in athletes
with the decrease in mental errors during performance.
Triangle of Effects:
Coaching
Behaviors
Mental
Errors/PerformanceSelf Confidence
45

46. In terms of translating the findings into applications when selecting appropriate
intervention techniques, cognitively based strategies may provide the most effective avenues for
reducing mental errors in sport (Bird & Horn, 1990). Intervention can also be implemented by
individual coaches; although, without identifying the problem there would be no cause for
intervention. Gearity and Murray (2011) suggest forms of coping for athletes with high stress
environments that can be introduced, with little to no cost, by the coach, such as goal setting,
positive self-talk, imagery, and relaxation training.
It is assumed that all coaches enjoy working with the highly confident, self-motivated
athlete. However, if an athlete does not exhibit high levels of self-confidence, then their output
may subconsciously contribute to the coaches’ behaviors that make the coach-athlete interaction
less compatible (Kenow & Williams 1999). Future researchers may wish to address this issue by
exposing the expressions of behavior of both the coaches and athletes in order to gain a better
perspective of what people feel in response to others’ behaviors. The internalization of behaviors
has been said to be what enhances or inhibits self-confidence. Players who feel less confident as
a result of their coaches’ behaviors tend to be less compatible with the coach and have less
impressive performances.
Kenow and Williams (1992) suggested that supporting behaviors of coaches are clear
communication to athletes regarding their roles and tasks. Research from Baker, Cotê and Hawes
(2000) add that by fostering a sense of preparedness in athletes, coaches can decrease forms of
anxiety by simply taking the time to change their behaviors. Becker (2009) notes that the balance
between the personal and professional relationship for the coach and athlete has a significant
bearing on an athlete’s performance as well; an important piece of the balance is some kind of
personal aspect to the relationship, and not business all of the time. The implementation of a
46

47. well-balanced coach athlete relationship will help create a perception of the relationship for the
athlete, thus enhancing self-confidence and ultimately reducing mental errors.
Although, there are many ways to evaluate self-confidence, mental errors, and coaching
behaviors, the examination of their interdependent relationship may be the route to building
successful teams – both on and off the court/fields. Future research should examine the variables
in a variety of specific sport settings. Application of the findings for each player and the coach
may be beneficial for the team environment, and may enhance athlete self-confidence and reduce
mental errors, which in turn will lead to better performance and results.
47

48. References
Critical Mass
*Baker, J., Jean, C., & Hawes, R. (2000). The relationship between coaching behaviors and sport
anxiety in athletes. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport Vol. 3 (No. 2). Pages 110-119
*Becker, A.J. (2009). It’s not what they do, it’s how they do it: Athlete experiences of great coaching.
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Vol. 4 (No. 1). Pages 93-119.
Bird. A.M., Horn. M.A., (1990). Cognitive Anxiety and Mental Errors in Sport. Journal of Sport &
Exercise Psychology, Vol. 12, pgs. 217-222.
*Gearity, B.T., Murray, M.A., (2011). Athletes’ experiences of the psychological effects of poor
coaching. Journal of Psychology of Sport & Exercise Vol. 12. Pages 213-211.
*Hays, K., Thomas, O., Maynard, I., & Butt, J. (2010). The role of confidence profiling in cognitive-
behavioral interventions in sport. The Sport Psychologist Vol. 18. Pages 393-414.
*Horn, S.T., Bloom, P., Berglund, K.M., & Packard, S. (2011). Relationship between collegiate
athletes’ psychological characteristics and their preferences for different types of coaching
behavior. The Sport Psychologist Vol. 25. Pages 190-211.
Kenow, L.J., & Williams. J.M., (1992). Relationship between anxiety, self-confidence, and evaluation
of coaching behaviors. The Sport Psychologist, Vol. 6. pages 344-357.
Kenow, L., Williams, J.M. (1999). Coach-athlete compatibility and athletes’ perception of coaching
behaviors. Journal of Sport Behavior, Vol. 22 (No. 2), pages 251-259.
*Lee, H., Magunsen, M.J., & Cho, S. (2013). Strength coach-athlete compatibility: Roles of coaching
behaviors and athlete gender. International Journal of Applied Sport Sciences Vol. 25 (No. 1).
Pages 55-67.
*Myers, N.D., Vargas-Tonsing, T.M., Feltz, D.L. (2005). Coaching efficacy in intercollegiate coaches:
sources of, coaching behavior, and team variables. Journal of Psychology of Sport & Exercise
Vol. 6. Pages 129-143.
*Ruggiero, T.E. & Lattin, K.S. (2008). Intercollegiate female coaches’ use of verbally aggressive
communication toward African American female athletes. Howard Journal of Communications
Vol. 19 (No. 2). Pages 105-124.
48

49. *Siekanska, M., Blecharz, J. & Wojtowicz, A. (2013). The athletes’ perception of coaches’ behaviors
towards competitors with a different level. Journal of Behavioural Sciences in Sport Vol. 39.
Pages 231-242.
*Williams, J.M., Jerome, G.J., Kenow, L.J., Rogers, T., Sartain, T.A., & Darland, G. (2003). Factor
structure of the coaching behavior questionnaire and its relationship to athlete variables. The
Sport Psychologist, Vol. 17, pages 16-34.
49

50. Appendix A: Synthesis Article Grid *In alphabetical order
Citation Purpose Methods &
Procedures
Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/Future
Research
Baker, J., Côte,
J., & Hawes, R.,
(2000). The
relationship
between
coaching
behaviors and
sport anxiety in
athletes. Journal
of Science and
Medicine in
Sport Vol. 3
(No. 2). Pages
110-119.
The purpose of this
article is to correlate
the relationship
between coaching
behaviors and sport
anxiety in athletes.
Using a variety of
performance and
perception of
coaching behavior
analyses, the
interpersonal
relationship
between coach and
athlete was
evaluated due to the
expectant nature
that the relationship
is predicted to
influence the
cognitive appraisal
of situations by
athletes.
Instrumentation used
in this article were
the Coach Behavior
Scale for Sport, a
44-item scale which
examines frequency
of 7 coaching
behaviors. Physical
Training and
Planning, Goal
Setting, Mental
Preparation,
Technical Skills,
Personal Rapport,
Negative Personal
Rapport,
Competition
Strategies, Sport
Anxiety. Sport
Anxiety Scale, a 22
item multi-
dimensional scale,
which measures trait
anxiety in sport
situations. Using
three sub-scales. 1
measuring somatic
anxiety, and 2
measuring forms of
cognitive anxiety.
Participants of
the study
included, 228
athletes, 46%
female and
52% male. All
who
participated on
average 11
plus years in
their respective
sports, and had
on average 2.2
years with their
current coach.
Multiple
regression
analyses were
used to
examine the
relationships
of the seven
coaching
behaviors and
three forms of
sport anxiety.
Age, gender
and sport type
were
statistically
controlled in
the first step to
remove their
influence on
the examined
relationships.
Results of the
regression
analyses clearly
indicated that
certain coach
behaviors are
better predictors
of sport anxiety
than others,
which
contrasted with
previous
research. But
can be attributed
to the use of
different scales
in research
analyses. The
strongest
relationship
found in this
study was
between
negative
personal rapport
behaviors and
anxiety levels in
athletes.
Athletes who report high
negative personal rapport
behaviors (feel intimidated, and
fearful of their coach) also report
higher mounts of sport anxiety.
The weighing of data suggests
that negative personal rapport
behaviors and competition
strategies behaviors are more
influential in the relationships
among forms of cognitive
anxiety than for somatic anxiety.
While the total anxiety measures
are significant for both of the
behaviors. The practical
applications of these results
suggest that coaches should
consider the impact that their
behaviors have on anxiety levels
in their athletes. Future research
should test these measures on
specific sports groups. By
fostering a sense of preparedness
in athletes by increasing the
frequency of these behaviors
prior to and during competition,
coaches can expect to decrease
these forms of anxiety in their
athletes.
50

51. Citation Purpose Methods &
Procedures
Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/
Future Research
Becker, A.J.
(2009). It’s not
what they do,
It’s how they do
it: Athlete
experiences of
great coaching.
International
Journal of
Sports Science
& Coaching
Vol. 4 (No. 1).
Pages 93-119.
The purpose of this
study was to
complete a gap in
the literature on
coaching behaviors.
The first gap being
that questionnaires
were used to
evaluate the
perceptions of
coaching behaviors
not feelings, the
second being the
exclusive study on
coaching behaviors
doesn’t not allow
the weight of other
factors in the
evaluations.
Specifically,
research on
coaching behaviors
provides valuable
information
regarding leadership
styles, feedback
patterns &
expectancy effects.
Phenomenological
research methods
were implemented to
capture athlete
experiences of great
coaching. The
interview method
was taken with great
emphasis to
complete the study.
The overarching
topic being an
athletes experience
in their collegiate
sports.
A sample of 18
participants
included 9
females and 9
males who
represented
various sports.
Race
identification
varied with
61% Caucasian
participants,
11% Asian,
11% African
American and
5% Pacific
Islander.
Data were
collected by
14 personal
interviews &
four phone
interviews due
to logistical
reasons.
Demographic
information
was collected
post interview.
All interviews
were
transcribed
verbatim,
which were
then, shared
with the
respective
participant for
clarifications
and comments.
Then
transcriptions
were
categorized in
search of
common
themes.
Six major
findings
included: Coach
Attributes,
Environment,
The System,
Relationships,
Coaching
Actions and
Influences.
Participants
described the
background
dimensions to
be stable
throughout their
experiences.
These coaches
were consistent
with who they
were and how
they maintained
relationships,
managed the
team
environment,
and carried out
their system.
Thus, there was
no uncertainty
and the athletes
The results revealed a more
comprehensive picture of factors
that underlie in coaching
greatness. Ultimately the
participants were able to
evaluate their collegiate
coaching experiences as long
lasting, extraordinary
impressions.
51

52. Citation Purpose Methods &
Procedures
Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/
Future Research
knew exactly
what to expect
from their
coaches.
Bird. A.M.,
Horn. M.A.,
(1990).
Cognitive
Anxiety and
Mental Errors in
Sport. Journal
of Sport &
Exercise
Phycology, Vol.
12, pgs. 217-
222.
The purpose of this
study was to show
that if metal errors
that occur during
competition are
representative of
cognitive/attentional
disruptions, then,
individuals who
exhibit more mental
errors should have
higher cognitive
anxiety than those
who demonstrate
fewer mental errors.
Utilizing the
explanation that the
increase in anxiety
that occurs as a
result of the highly
evaluative nature of
the competitive
setting as compared
to practice
conditions to prove
the relative nature
cognitive anxiety
Prior to competition
participants were
given the CSAI-2
and immediately
after performance
they were given the
MEQ. The MEQ
was based on a 10-
point bipolar scale
ranging from much
affected (many
mental errors) to
very little affected
(few mental errors).
Individuals were
then assessed by
groups of High
Mental Mistakes (1-
4) and Low Mental
Mistakes (7-10)
based on confidence
levels.
The initial
subject pool
was 202
female high
school varsity
softball
players, ages
14-17. After
the first round
of
questionnaires
the pool was
narrowed down
to 161
participants by
elimination of
questionnaire
results where
those receiving
a score of 5-6
were
eliminated to
represent two
extremes sides
of the results.
Each had
permission
A MANOVA
was used to
determine if
there were
overall
differences
between the
low and the
high mental
groups.
Consistent with
other available
evidence, the
predictive
ability of the
scales may vary
as a function of
certain
situational
factors, skill
level, and nature
of sport.
The authors
stated that the
results support
the prediction
that elevations
in cognitive
anxiety are
directly related
to mental errors
that occur
during sport
performance.
The framework that guides this
study: cognitive (worry), and
somatic (heightened
physiological activation) types
of anxiety, has shown its need
for understanding. There is a
need to understand the
intricacies of the anxiety process
and effects of motor output.
When translating the findings
into applications and selecting
appropriate intervention
techniques, cognitively based
strategies should provide the
most effective avenues for
reducing mental errors in sport.
52

53. Citation Purpose Methods &
Procedures
Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/
Future Research
and mental errors. from the
school and
head coaches
to participate.
Gearity, B.T.,
Murray, M.A.,
(2011).
Athletes’
experiences of
the
psychological
effects of poor
coaching.
Journal of
Psychology of
Sport &
Exercise Vol.
12. Pages 213-
211.
The purpose of this
study was to
describe the
psychological
effects of poor
coaching reported
by collegiate,
professional and
semi-professional
athletes by
employing a
qualitative research
design, this study
sought to describe
lived experiences to
build the
framework.
The subjects were
chosen by a process
of elimination in
which the author
solicited a variety of
athletes who
answered questions
to deem them fit for
the study. If an
athletes’ responses
showed signs of
poor coaching they
were invited to be a
part of the study. In
a phenomenological
approach participant
experiences were
shared through a
series of
interviewing and
transcribing, which
developed five main
themes: Poor
teaching by the
coach, Uncaring,
Unfair, Inhibiting
athlete’s mental
Participants of
the study
included 16
former and
current athletes
who self-
reported
having been
poorly
coached.
As themes
were analyzed,
they were
broken into the
following
emerging sub
themes:
distracting,
engendering
self-doubt,
demotivating,
dividing the
team, focus
concentration
and attention,
cohesion and
stress and
coping. By
process of
categorizing
statements and
stories of
experiences,
researchers
compared
them to each
other as well
Findings of the
study were
assessed in
relation to two
widely known
theories: Social
Cognitive
Theory and
Achievement
Goal Theory.
They were
found to support
previous
research
suggesting that a
coach created
ego-goal climate
is associated
with athletes
perceiving
greater peer
conflict, less
social support
and positive
feedback, more
punishment-
based feedback,
Consistent with the call to
diversify approaches to the
coach-athlete relationship, the
study highlighted the strength of
a phenomenological approach to
understanding athletes lived
experiences. The study
concluded that future research
consists of interventions and
adaptations to coping skills such
as goal setting, positive self-talk,
imagery, and relaxation training,
in settings where the coach-
athlete relationship is deemed a
negative one.
53

54. Citation Purpose Methods &
Procedures
Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/
Future Research
skills and Athlete
coping.
as to place
topics in
relation to
SCT or AGT.
and higher
anxiety and
performance
related worry.
Hays, K.,
Thomas, O.,
Maynard, I., &
Butt, J. (2010).
The role of
confidence
profiling in
cognitive-
behavioral
interventions in
sport. The Sport
Psychologist
Vol. 18. Pages
393-414.
Authors of this
study took a case
study approach to
examine the
application of
confidence profiling
to the development
of individualized
applied
psychological skills
intervention. The
purpose was to
explore the
effectiveness of
confidence profiling
as the basis for
confidence-
enhancing
interventions.
The study was
conducted in three
phases. Phase 1
included consisted of
gathering
background
information and
establishing
participant needs. In
phase 2, a cognitive
behavioral
intervention
included cognitive
restructuring as well
as setting personal
affirmations. Phase 3
included an
intervention
evaluation where
confidence types
were assessed. Each
using Murphy’s 8
Step Cognitive
Behavior Model.
The
participants
included one
female athlete
who had over
eight years’
competition
experience.
Due to the
case study
approach to
this
examination,
each phase
could not be
worked on
simultaneously
rather
consecutively.
Phase 1
included initial
contact with
coach and
player,
confidence
profiling for
each, and
summary.
Phase 2
included
identification
of
development
areas,
cognitive
The study found
that use of
Murphy’s eight
step model, was
one of
significance and
the benefit of
confidence
profiling for the
athlete, which
can be applied
as a means to
enhance sport
confidence.
More
importantly, it
can be used to
measure
confidence from
the athlete’s
perspective &
provide a basis
of one’s own
confidence
needs.
Findings suggest that the process
of confidence profiling can be
used for empowerment and
confidence building. In future
research the model can be used
as a means of intervention for
coach’s behaviors and for
perceptions of coaching
behaviors, by allowing the
athlete to examine self-impact of
feedback.
54

55. Citation Purpose Methods &
Procedures
Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/
Future Research
restructuring,
personal
affirmations
and self-
esteem and
goal setting.
Phase 3
included re-
administration
of the
confidence
profile, a post-
experimental
interview and
post
intervention
debrief with
the coach.
Horn, S.T.,
Bloom, P.,
Berglund, K.M.,
& Packard, S.
(2011).
Relationship
between
collegiate
athletes’
psychological
characteristics
and their
preferences for
The purpose of this
study was to
determine if
athletes’
psychological
characteristics are
correlated with their
preferences for
different types of
coaching behaviors
and leadership
styles.
The study consisted
of a series of self-
report questionnaires
which were
constructed to
specifically measure
the following
variables of interest:
Preferred coaching
behaviors,
Motivational
orientation, and
Competitive trait
The
participants
consisted of
195
intercollegiate
athletes, which
was filtered
down from an
original count
of 207 NCAA
Division III
athletes. Of the
sample 109
The self-report
questionnaires
were
administered
before or after
a sport
session, where
a member of
the research
team provided
both oral and
written
explanation of
According to
this model an
athlete preferred
coaching
behavior will
vary as a
function of both
their own
personal
characteristics
and factors in
the sport
context.
There is a relatively large body
of research to show that the
behaviors exhibited by coaches
in practice and competitive
contexts do have a significant
impact on their athletes’ levels
of anxiety and motivational
orientation. Mainly, this study
concludes with the stress on the
importance of the coach/athlete
relationship, where it is only
formidable to create the
environment that suits each
55

56. Citation Purpose Methods &
Procedures
Participants Analysis Findings Discussion/Implications/
Future Research
different types
of coaching
behavior. The
Sport
Psychologist
Vol. 25. Pages
190-211.
anxiety. Which then
brought forth
additional sub-
scales.
were males and
86 females,
with an age
range of 18-26
years old.
These athletes
participated in
a variety of
sports.
the research
project. Data
were collected
nameless and
anonymously.
Descriptive
statistics were
computed and
screened, a
univariate
analysis was
used to
strengthen the
relationship
between the
variables and
each data set.
Consistent with
the study
hypothesis, the
multivariate
results revealed
that athletes
scores on the
sport anxiety
subscales were
positively linked
to preference for
training and
instruction, a
democratic
leadership, style,
social support,
& positive and
informational-
based feedback.
athlete if the coach is open and
transparent with their intentions
while understanding the needs of
their players.
Kenow, L.J., &
Williams. J.M.,
(1992).
Relationship
between anxiety,
self-confidence,
and evaluation
of coaching
behaviors. The
Sport
Psychologist,
Vol. 6. pages
The purpose of this
study was to test in
a specific setting
Smith and Smoll’s
leadership
behaviors in sport,
additionally to
examine whether or
not athletes’ state
anxiety, self-
confidence and
perceptions of their
The approach was
conducted via two
case studies. Study 1
took place 4 days
prior to and 4 days
after a game, with
questions being
administered by an
assistant coach and
similar in nature. Ex:
my coach is usually
calm before a game
Participants of
the study
included 11
female college
basketball
players and
their male head
coach, from an
NCAA
Division III
team in the
southwest, this
In cases,
anxiety
measures were
made with use
of the CSAI-2,
assessing both
cognitive and
somatic
anxiety. As
well as the 28-
item Coaching
Behavior
Primary results
of study 1
included an
observation that
athletes who
scored high in
self-confidence
evaluated
coaching
behaviors
positively while
those who
Authors found common in case
two, that players evaluating
coaching outbursts as unhelpful
while coach saw their behavior
to be motivational. As athletes
evaluated their coach, they
perceived his state to be more
anxious and less confident than
he actually was. Which showed
to be contrary to the hypothesis.
On the other hand, another
hypothesis proved correct where
56